If you are going to have kids make sure you have the capacity to take care of them. There is nothing worse than seeing a mother who can’t do anything for herself let alone for her kids. Instead it’s pick the phone up and call whoever will listen, whoever will be a sucker enough to take pity on you (poor granddad). There is more to life than sitting in front of a computer trying to find the perfect mate (run hide all single men). Try doing something with your three children. The television should not be their entertainment all day every day. I don’t even think you serve a meal at the kitchen table. What are these kids going to grow up to do? Teach them some family values, show them there is more to life then sitting in front of the computer screen all day every day. I feel bad for these little kids who have a mother that doesn’t put their needs ahead of her’s! All they are to you is a CHEQUE! Pathetic and sad. —bccoastfan
This article appears in Jul 5-11, 2012.
this is how my mom was, on a good day.
needless to say none of us have much of a relationship with her
but 3 out of 5 are university students
another took her lead as a mother and has custody of none of her children and the other is still just a teen but she’s very hopeful in being successful.
luckily we got to live with our dad in our teens and that kind of made mom brighten up
Cut her some slack, OP. The last time she took her kids out, some rake called her a hooker.
Unfortunately, Ob, they are her kids to raise as she sees fit-which doesn’t sound very “fit” to me. Some self centered people just don’t appreciate the fact that they need to show their children the world, teach them how it works, and how to get along in it. Maybe she lacks the skills, or the want to do this for them. They are painfully low on her priority list, poor kids.
Straight up neglect.
In the ‘old days’ the kids at least had to learn to write their name inorder to sign their future Welfare cheques.
I was born in a house with the television always on
Guess I grew up too fast
And I forgot my name
We’re in cities at night and we got time on our hands
So leave the driving to us
And it’s the real thing
And you’re rolling
In the blender
With me
And I can love you
Like a color
TV
…and I turned out just fine (twitch twitch).
you must have pretty good eyesight there o.p.? to see this all the way from b.c., or are you in the city? the way i don’t see it, she is the only one that will suffer, if they ever take her paycheque away. then she will have to go back to curbing again. but hey, live and let live, until you know the exact nature of the beast, you can’t slay it, or even try to control it.
let her alone, a guy like me will come along some day, then the kids will have sommeone they can call dad, and love them, as they will probly love him. the mom is just a piece of meat right now, for all who want to taste it. chill the fuck out, and let time heal the wounds that it never inflicted.
My mother exhausted every emotion I had, using two things she knew best – drama and guilt. When she died, I didn’t feel a whole lot, to tell you the truth. I have yet to shed a single tear since she died on my birthday a year ago. It is what it is and I’m at peace with it. I’m probably a better mother because I had an abusive, selfish mater. These kids will probably try to be everything their mother is not.
Some mother’s don’t give a shit who does what to their children.Some ‘serve up’ their little girls to men so that the mother herself doesn’t have to be bothered to do her wifely duties
Some little girls grow up to be whores.Some grow up with ‘victim’ tattooed on her fucking forhead ,for fucked up men to rape and abuse,so she keeps her sexuality under lock and key, too afraid to be hurt again.
No wonder there’s some fucked up women/mothers.
I see your point, Boru. But, coming from a standpoint of a child of one of these aforementioned mothers, I could never let the cycle continue. I would never want my little girls to experience one second of what I went through.
I think in this case, there could be under lying problems, but all I can see is self centered, lazy immaturity.
Maybe you can arrange an intervention OP if you’re a relative. Include granddad.
Kontee–I would land in prison if I had a little girl and some sick bastard hurt her in anyway.
My mother was a self centered, selfish,immature, old bag.She ‘marked’ me for life by allowing sex abuse to continue.Hell if she pimped me out at least we would’ve had food to eat.
Troodon–This topic isn’t funny but I do appreciate a good laugh.Shit(my life) becomes way too fucking serious at times.
Meh, my mother used to tell my sister and I that we ruined her life and she wished we were never born, on a weekly if not daily basis. When my parents finally got divorced, she told dad he “was not sticking her with the kids”. Yeah, she was awsome.
Steve-I hope your dad treated you and your sister better.Just maybe your mum did you a favour by not taking you.
Yeah, my dad’s great. Very supportive and accepting of anything I do.
I’ve got nothing but good things to say about my Mum & Dad.
TO say they were great is an understatement, my brothers and I had a really good upbringing IMO, I can’t ever remember anything serious bad & they are still going strong, which is wonderful.
I adored my dad but he was dead by the time I was 17. I can remember thinking: why the fuck did he leave me with HER? The same woman who demanded from him as he was dying: ‘WHO’S GOING TO MOW THE YARD? WHO’S GOING TO FIX THE ROOF?’ Poor guy, I swear, died just to get away from her. Then she lived another 40 years to berate and guilt me and the sibs until dementia set in. Mercifully, she forgot who I was.
PHILOSOPHY 102: “THE TITLE OF MOTHER”
This bitch relates to the qualities a mother must possess in order to be called a “mother.” However, what has philosophy to say about the “Title of Mother?” Our first step is to examine the logical implications of the title. Read the following:
“MARY IS A MOTHER BUT SHE NEVER HAD CHILDREN.”
What is wrong with this? That’s right! It is incoherent since the term “mother” logically entails having had children. While the sentence is grammatically correct it lacks meaning on the basis of the logic of entailment contained in the concept of “mother.” So what’s next? Read the following:
“THE PRESENT KING OF FRANCE IS BALD.”
The sentence is grammatically correct but equally meaningless since, of course, there IS no present king of France. In other words, the sentence lacks a denotative referent. But at least it takes us out of the logic of entailment we saw in the case of the concept of “mother” and into the real world of objects even if, in the present instance, the object concerned doesn’t exist. This points to the concept of truth, that there are sentences which are true and others which are false. Read the following:
“THE STATEMENT ‘SNOW IS WHITE’ IS TRUE IF AND ONLY IF SNOW IS WHITE.”
This is called a “Tarski Sentence” since some guy named Tarski came up with it. What does it mean? It means that for a statement to be true it must correspond with an extra-linguistic state of affairs, in the present case, that snow is indeed white. But what if a dog came by, raised its leg, and pissed on the snow. It would no longer be white but – and this is important – it would still be snow. This is because colour is a SECONDARY QUALITY, something which all objects possess but which is not PRIMARY, that is, not definitive of their “real” nature. We must distinguish between PRIMARY and SECONDARY qualities. But the difficulty with Tarski Sentences is that the assessment of their truth presupposes access to an extra-linguistic state of affairs which, of course, is impossible. We do not have such access for the vast majority of our linguistic assertions. We do not go around continually saying, “Snow is white.” For example, what extra-linguistic state of affairs would this post correspond to in order for it to be assessed as true? This means that the CORRESPONDENCE THEORY OF TRUTH, like the logic of entailment in the case of Mary (see above) falls short. What’s next? Well, there’s always the
COHERENCE THEORY OF TRUTH
which maintains that something is true if it “coheres with” my conceptual framweork. For something to be true in terms of the coherence theory of truth it must have “conceptual fit” with that framweork. But the objection to the coherence theory of truth is necesarily subjective. It is relative to the particular individual’s conceptual framework. So what’s next?
Well, there’s nothing next but it’s been fun taking the implications of the title of “Mother” into the murky realms of philosophical truth.
This, by the way, was my 1000th. post on this site. Choirs of schoolchildren will sing and adults will dance in the streets.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!