Parents have to fight hard to find new ways to get through to their offspring.
Naturally, there are those who might think it pointless to bother communicating with them at all. Yet somehow parents keep trying like the spurned lovers of Cleopatra.
According to The Washington Post, the latest trend in parenting patter is to nag your kids by text.
The article points out some touching nuances. Kids don't like picking up the phone when a parent calls. A text that says, for example, "u little dolt. Where the hell are u?" can be read rather more discreetly.
Some parents apparently send their kids one-worders such as "Update." To which I know that my own inclination as a 12-year-old would have been to reply "Up Yours."
I suppose it depends on how good the parent/child relationship is.
I cannot help but wonder, though, whether all this technological access is giving parents a little too much opportunity to nag and set a bad example at the same time.
You see, one can imagine a bored wife spending an afternoon with her part-time fitness trainer and lover while still sending a text demanding that little Steven does his homework.
One can conceive of a dreadful businessman in some sleazy lapdancing club imploring sweet Sophie-Anne by text to clean her room.
Parents can now go online to check their kids' grades with just one flick at their iPhones. They can more effectively stalk and haunt their children's lives like ghouls of godliness while living up to none of their own principles.
Sending a text can surely deliver the same level of whininess as a moan over the breakfast table or a call, but the mere technology behind texting gives parents far too much ease with which to nag without end or consequence.
Some parents even send texts demanding that their kids send them pictures to prove their room is clean. Why don't they send pictures of their own rooms?
The kids are striking back. In an ingenious move, those who receive texts in class are often using manically texting parents as their excuse.
Shouldn't there be limits placed on parental texting mania? Two texts a day, oldies. One in the morning, one in the evening. Any more and you're grounded.
The new opossum Webkinz toy, exclusively at Cracker Barrel.
(Credit: Crackerbarrel.com)I know it's hard to prevent your children from gaining an early fascination with drugs, violence, weapons, World of Warcraft, and illicit personal behavior.
The phenomenon that is Webkinz is but one brave attempt.
In case you inhabit a particularly large hole in Nova Scotia, Webkinz turns your children into loving, caring humans online.
On the Webkinz site, your children can look after their new pets. Well, as long as they buy the physical, three-dimensional stuffed version at a friendly neighborhood store.
So it is my heartfelt privilege to be able to tell you that should you choose to eat, drink, shop, or merely loiter with questionable intent at Cracker Barrel, you might discover the first ever Webkinz toy made exclusively for a retailer. It will be available beginning September 11.
For this venturesome enterprise, the Webkinz zookeepers have decided to offer an opossum, he of the cute little face and rather narrow brain.
What sweet, innocent child could not fall in love with this pink-pawed pet, which, like the finest of Black Sabbath tracks, lives just as happily in Web world as it does in the physical form?
I believe even Damien Thorn himself would clutch this little sweetie to his chest and whisper: "I could never turn the heat up on you, my friend. Not even online."
I am, however, still somewhat troubled by the choice of opossum. You see, aren't these the animals that play dead when they feel threatened?
Surely we don't want to be teaching our children to mimic surrender at the first sign of trouble? No, they should stand up to oppressors, not play opossums.
For the first exclusive at Cracker Barrel, couldn't they have mustered an aardvark? Aardvarks have a thick skin, they can lash out with all fours and they can eat up to 50,000 insects in just one night.
Wouldn't that be a better example for our children to follow?
I know many people have strong feelings about euthanasia. And who am I to suggest that old people have few uses?
However, who is Michael Amatrudo to put his parents up for sale on Craigslist?
According to NBC New York, Amatrudo's wife is used to his sense of humor. You might conclude, though, that she has suffered enough. For her loving husband decided, just for a little fun, to put his parents up for sale on America's most useful human exchange.
Amatrudo's ad was a poem to filial love: "I got lots of use out of these guys over the past 50 years, but it's time to move on," he wrote. "Will consider trade for newer model, hot blonde under age 40 or an Erector Set in good condition. MUST SEE! Please email or call Michael for additional details and pics. $155.00 OBO."
This being America, the most tasteful of Madison, Conn.'s, residents claims he received many replies to his kind offer.
This picture was taken in Madison, Ct. But I do not believe these are the parents in question.
(Credit: CC Faeryboots/Flickr)Well, he was wise enough to list Ed and Arlene Amatrudo as being in "excellent overall condition and still plenty of life left in them."
While he claims he was touched by those who wrote to him suggesting that really good parents are, indeed, a very rare commodity, one has to wonder about Amatrudo's psyche.
You see, according to the Associated Press, Amatrudo is a 51-year-old insurance executive.
And he told NBC New York that his motivation for the ad was that he was bored. So I ventured to LinkedIn to see if I could discover more about this man.
Well, I could only find the one Michael Amatrudo, who appears to have spent 23 years with the same insurance company, Aon Re.
Should this be the gentleman concerned, everything is surely explained. How else can a man who has spent so much of his life with one insurance company make himself laugh other than to try selling his parents on Craigslist? Watching old Monty Python sketches just has no effect any more.
One can only wonder whether his parents cut him out of their will. You know, just for fun.
How could he put them up for sale for $155? They had to be worth at least $200. Typical insurance company undervaluation.
Dena Christofferson is 13 years old. She likes to send texts. Lots of texts. She particularly likes to send texts at school.
In fact, in a recent month she sent 10,003 of those curt little messages. And received almost 10,000.
Her parents were a little surprised at this. Not because she told them. But because Verizon sent them a bill for $4,756.25.
You see, Gregg and Jaylene Christofferson, from Cheyenne, Wyo., thought texting on little Dena's phone had been disabled. And $4,756.25 is a lot of money.
"It hit us like a rock," Gregg told NBC's Channel 9 News in Colorado.
Rocks can sometimes rain down in multiples, so perhaps it wasn't entirely a surprise that Dena's school principal called to say she had suddenly achieved five Fs in a semester. Strange that he didn't text, but still.
This was one rock too many for Gregg Christofferson. He got out his hammer and smashed that Verizon phone into several pieces.
... Read moreWhen Googlies are clever enough to name their latest, most wonderful brainchild "Goggles," you wonder why it is they have no idea what to call their human children.
Jason Morrison, whose LinkedIn page describes him as a search quality strategist at Google, has begun to conduct a worldwide Internet search for a high-quality name to adorn his and his wife's unborn child.
Please, yes, I know I like a joke or two when the world's winds are against me, but this is serious.
On his own personal, very personal Web site, Jason declares: "We've perused baby name Web sites and tried the Freakonomics tactic of predicting popular names, but to be honest, none of it was really working."
I'm a little confused. Is this the Freakonomics tactic that's related to the world's current financial "am I wearing underpants" moment?
And it's hard to tell just what wasn't working for Jason and his wife. Were their chosen methods all suggesting Jim for a boy and Alanis for a girl?
All one can be sure of is that Mr. Morrison is conducting a poll, asking for any and all suggestions, though his site offers a shortlist from which visitors can vote. This shortlist includes Asma for a girl (um, breathing difficulties, anyone?) and Dylan for a boy (isn't Sean Penn's daughter called Dylan?).
Mr. Morrison doesn't offer us any of the personal clues that would make the chances of helping this forlorn couple so much more possible. However, you will be discombobulated to hear that he is taking the opportunity of his child emerging into this uncertain world to sell you some Google products:
"In the next couple days, I'll also put up a live graph of the results. If you'd like to learn how to use Google Docs and Spreadsheets to put a poll on your site (or name your baby), check out this post." (No, I won't be linking you to a Google Docs and Spreadsheets site.)
Fear not, though, Mr. Morrison is not another humorless, marble-free techie. For he ends his plaintive Internet cry with these words: "We're expecting a baby November 16th, and we need help choosing a name. This is a difficult decision that will have a huge impact on the life of an innocent human being. Naturally, we are turning to random Internet strangers for help."
Strangely for a Googlie, Mr. Morrison is not going to trust in the word of the masses, if they choose something that he and his wife deem unsuitable: "We do reserve the right to ignore the results of the poll completely. Otherwise, we'll end up with a kid named Mr. Splashy Pants. Actually, that has a nice ring to it..."
My vote: Larry if it's a boy and Page if it's a girl. What do you say?
- prev
- 1
- next
