, , , Sewing Machine For Your Kids, Respect Are the

By Fausto Deonarian on February 22, 2012
0

Kids sewing machines are a fantastic introduction to creative crafting. There is no far better way to have a child serious about sewing than to offer her a children's machine of her really very own.

Most machines which can be bought particularly for children are extra toy than tool, which may make discovering sewing pure exciting. Colorful, lightweight, and usually associated with favorite characters like Barbie and Hello Kitty, these super-simplified machines fascinate children. While youngsters are having enjoyable they are establishing both creativity and coordination and laying the foundation for the lifetime talent.

As this is a toy machine for little children, the size with the machine will probably be just right. It will not likely really feel like a threatening or scary piece of tools. Relying on the form of machine you buy you can get one that may be attractively decorated in order that your son or daughter will know that this distinct toy is specifically customised for their use. They are available in equally battery and AC powered variations, and quite a few have dual power options. Most models involve drop-in bobbins for ease of use and the most effective also have finger guards, a special safety feature that keeps little fingers aside through the needle.

A kids sewing machine will not be as expensive as an everyday a single. It is also something that you choose to may possibly prefer to carry into consideration. This is a beneficial way to start a child away from to determine if they'd prefer to proceed to learn how to sew as they get older. If you take a seem online you should be able to figure out exactly where you are able to get the perfect bargains.

Training kids to sew could be enjoyable, but simultaneously it can make you fairly anxious. Sewing machines present a whole lot of safety risks to young children with little management. Young children who will be enthusiastic about sewing possess a tendency to would like to go far too fast for their own good, so make sure you are extremely cautious whenever you start out.

Christine Jarvis - Once A Caregiver

Old age ... a walk in the park! - Liaurinko - image used with permission

"In these breezy times of artificial chumminess, when real friendship is often replaced by forced smiles and first-name banter, many people avoid honourifics at all costs." (Ken Gallinger)

"Well, just because Johnny jumps off the bridge doesn't mean we all have to follow!" (My Mom)

One Tapestry, Many Threads

Ken Gallinger, a Toronto newspaper columnist, recently wrote two columns based on the question of how society in general, and doctors' office staff in particular, address patients, and whether or not people should be treated deferentially simply because they are old.

Thread One

A retired physician had written to Mr. Gallinger, describing a medical appointment he and his wife had attended. The physician and his wife, also a retired physician, both in their mid 80s, were new patients to a medical practice. They had been called by their first names by office staff, and subsequently the new "young doctor—who could have been our grandchild" greeted them by their first names "while introducing herself as Dr. XY." Both the physician and his wife were miffed by the informality and presumption of being addressed on a first-name basis. He concluded his letter to Ken Gallinger with the question: "Should we confront her [the new doctor] directly?"

In response, Mr. Gallinger described two schools of thought. One school believes that a title (like "Doctor") is part of our personal identity and carries through all aspects of our life (like blue eyes—my example), and the other school believes that titles describe something we do. The second school would have us shuck our titles when we are not in the arena (a god is a god only when doing godly acts, and not when he is sunning in heaven's hammock, a writer is a writer only when she is engaged in the act of writing, the pope is "His Holiness" in church but "Benny" on the golf course—again, my examples.)

Thread Two

Mr. Gallinger also shines a headlight on the physician's use of the word "confront." Gallinger advises that "there's nothing to be offended about ... speak to your pleasant, young doctor [if it bothers you to be first-named] ... there is no reason to 'confront' her."

When I first read the physician's story, I barely noticed the word confront in the overall context of the story. Upon second and closer reading, not knowing the physician, his usual manner of speaking, or his intention in using the word, I still didn't see a need to underline or otherwise highlight the word. My sense, as a reader, was that the issue important to the physician was his distaste for the presumption of the younger doctor in addressing him by first name. Secondarily, he was asking how best to go about relieving his own discomfort when next he meets the new doctor. I doubt a physical or angry verbal confrontation was his intended plan of action.

Thread Three

Ken Gallinger makes this an age-related issue by telling his correspondent in the first article, "like many of your generation, you're from the first school of thought, while your doctor is from the second."

Mr. Gallinger makes his own position clear: "I'm on her [i.e. the young doctor's] side," the implication being that this is the correct side to be on.

Mr. Gallinger develops the theme in his second article, questioning whether older people are more deserving of respect than younger people, simply because they are older. He concludes, "we disrespect people when we define them as old—rather than as people."

He gives the example of a good car as one defined "not by clicks on the odometer but by whether it starts in the morning," implying that a car is worthwhile for its functionality, not for its vintage.

Vintage Cars, Vintage People

People are not cars. With people, clicks on the odometer do count. Vintage is part of our functionality because, in my humble 63-year-old opinion, older age often carries within it a measure of wisdom and experience not yet acquired by the younger set. Wisdom and experience, again in my humble 63-year-old opinion, are most definitely deserving of deference, courtesy, and respect. (And yes, I advocate respect for these qualities if they are demonstrated in a younger person, too!)

But are we more deserving of respect than the younger crowd?

Practical Application of Theory

I remember a high school Latin teacher who expected us to conduct ourselves in public (i.e. his classroom) as mature ladies and gentlemen, rather than the young hooligans we truly were.

On our first day in class, I've no doubt we thought this guy was a few beers short of a full case, but the first-day respect he accorded and demanded of us continued throughout the year, and indeed, seeped into our behaviour in other areas of the school.

Perhaps it was just his unique method of crowd control. He addressed us as "Mr. Jones" or "Miss Smith" and it worked! It was impossible to play the teenaged smartass with someone who believed that teacher and student were equally important and who showed us the respect he asked for in return.

As I recall, we rose to expectation. The wildest anyone ever got that year was to scribble on the blackboard following a city transit strike: sick transit glorious monday. (For any among you who didn't take Latin with Mr. Tovell and don't see the pun intended ... it's poorer you are for it now.)

The point is, we were given the respect normally given to our elders, and we responded with respect in return.

What Is This Thing Called Respect?

The Canadian Oxford Dictionary defines respect as a "deferential esteem felt or shown towards a person, thing or quality." Esteem, the dictionary also tells us, involves "having a high regard for, or thinking favourably of."

Should we have high regard for, or think favourably of, older people just because they are older?

Mr. Gallinger thinks not. He says, "treating people deferentially simply because they are old is like assuming women need a seat on the subway simply because they are women. It's not chivalrous - it's prejudicial."

I beg to differ. I am a woman. I have traveled on Toronto subways as a child, as a teenager, as a young working adult, and as an older-age working adult. I can assure Mr. Gallinger that I and thousands of women like me won't take offence or think him prejudiced if he offers us a seat. I suspect most of us would just say a tired "thank you" and be grateful to get off our feet.

(Children, by the way, according to how I was raised, get up and offer a seat to anyone older, male or female, or feel Mom's hand slapping them upside the head until they do.)

As For Me

Here's where I stand: I am 63 years old. I worked in doctors' offices for over 20 years. I don't share Ken Gallinger's view on this one. I believe it's best for us to go wide upon first introductions (especially with older people, and especially in formal roles like doctor-patient, pastor and congregation, and the like). I like the use of titles for folks who have earned them. What does it hurt? Only when invited should we go deep with the use of first names.

The matter is solved simply, of course. Just ask people: How do you prefer to be addressed? Then do that.

As for me, I am never offended when someone addresses me as "Miss" or "Ms," and I will happily address you as "Doctor" or "Professor" or any such respectful term you've earned. If the relationship goes from formal to friendly, we can first-name it then.

Sources

What's up with the lack of honourifics, Doc?

Do the elderly deserve respect for being old?

Canadian Oxford Dictionary. Second Edition. Oxford University Press. 2004.