Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Children, to have them young or to have them when you are well aged....that is the question

Has anyone else noticed the huge percentage of girls under the age of 20 having kids (and not just on accident) but purposefully wanting kids at that age? Well I have noticed.
If that's one's choice then I guess it is what it is. However, can these girls even explain why they want kids at such a young age (other than "babies are cute", " I love the smell of babies", "I just want to be a mother"... etc). I am not dissing on these perfectly lovely reasons that were plucked straight from puffy white clouds floating above of us, but shouldn't they be thinking about what all comes with this responsibility? These aren't stuffed animals or pets for that matter. They are little mini humans that will grow up affected by what choices the parents makes. They may not take into account and notice things at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years. But by the time they're 3? They will be remembering everything. Copying everything. Watching and learning by what you do. Scary right? You will be their greatest example in everything.
I know some girls that just want to get married, have a home and have kids. That's all they want to do. Nothing wrong with that. But, let's just say you just finished school, you're 18 and you are in love, you get married......whala! One month later you're expecting. You may very well be ready for that because that's what you've wanted your whole life. But what happens if you reach 30 years old and realize that you have five kids and you are still doing exactly what you were doing when you turned 18. If that wasn't enough odds are you still have another almost 10 years until your finished raising the oldest of your five. So you will probably be well into your 50s by the time you have finished raising your last child. And what have you done? I know you can enjoy a lot while taking "family vacations" and "retirement" but keep in mind when you vacation and have experiences with kids, you have less funds, less freedom, less physical energy and less overall ability to do things other than what is fitting for children. When you are retired you have plenty of funds, plenty of freedom, less physical energy (possibly health) and just overall physical ability to do things that you could have done in your 20s, even 30s.
What about the girls that aren't even done with school, aren't in a serious relationship (let alone married) and they get pregnant? The interesting part is that they are actually excited about this. They aren't embarrassed and they aren't concerned. Wait for it.....they are overjoyed! They are excited! They are can't wait for their little bundle of joy. Gee, great. Another child that childless people have to help raise (tax money). Especially considering this particular group will probably and most likely be on some form of welfare, WIC, etc.
The other group are girls that have finished school and are just plain screw-ups. They haven't set out to do anything they originally wanted to accomplish. They have a dead beat boyfriend and they barely make it by as it is. Yet, they are happily bringing a baby into this dysfunctional conjunction of a life that they live. Oh and by the way this group will also be accepting some form of welfare assistance, I have no doubt.
I see more and more of these three examples everyday. I am 27 and I don't have kids...yet. I definitely want a child. My husband and I talk about more often now than we used too. We have been married for 4 1/2 years and we have been enjoying that experience. I truly think that people that wait at least 1 year before starting a family with kids have an extremely smooth adventure ahead of them. When you jump right into having kids you aren't giving yourself enough time to get used to living together. Kids don't need to be subjected to this kind of imbalance.
I want to be able to tell my kids about my experiences (which may not necessarily be something as exotic as swimming with whales, or kayaking in Alaska) but parasailing, visiting Caribbean islands, etc. are experiences they wonderful things to enjoy. I want to be able to pull out my photo albums and show them cool stuff and have suggestions for things that they should try.
You are going to want your kids to have wonderful experiences. You are going to want them to live life to the fullest. Encourage this!
But hey, sometimes they really are people that just want to go through life pregnant and are addicted to the smell of a newborn baby. Kudos to you. That takes a truly special woman. For those of you who do decide to wait, DON'T (I cannot stress this enough) feel guilty. Life is short, live it!

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Pro Vaccine, Anti Vaccine, What's the Difference, It's Just Two Groups In a Pissing Contest

I am so SICK of the pissing contest between Pro Vaccinators and Anti Vaccinators. All either of these groups care about is judging the other and a child actually does get sick from either group, there is an immediate "ha ha I told you so" or "You had it coming, you never should have ignored vaccines" or "You had it coming you never should have gotten them vaccinated".
Really? Shouldn't we all want the same thing? Shouldn't we all want the health and well being of our children?
There are a few things that I can't help but used as examples (of course some if not many will say that these are easily explained).
One: If vaccines are unimportant and actually make you sick rather than keep you from getting sick, than why has the number of cases of measles, polio, influenza, whooping cough, etc. gotten smaller rather than bigger?  I can't honestly remember the last time we had a major epidemic. I know people think that the vaccines cause autoimmune diseases and SIDS. Yes, maybe a vaccination does cause this but again what about the fact that thousands used to die of these diseases everyday (parents lived in fear for their children's lives) and now there are only a handful cases in a year?
Two: If natural is better, than why wasn't it working generation after generation after generation. You would think that sanitation and healthy eating would be enough. But do we really know if it is?
Three: It seems as though some (anti vaccinators) just want to be right. They want to find the answer themselves. They want to be independent to a point that they need no assistance whatsoever.
Something that is curious to me is that most people that are anti-vaccines are also completely against hospital birth or hospital aided birth. They will support birthing centers or homebirth. Now, I am not criticizing the bravery and strength of women who choose to have a baby by home birth/birthing center, however if that's the case then why are they so intent on criticizing those that choose hospital birth? Because of arrogance.
Arrogance is what I truly believe will be the downfall involving the winning side of vaccines/no vaccines. Because let's face it, eventually one will outweigh the other.
Why do I think arrogance is a key factor?
Example, so if lack of healthy diet and sanitation are what originally caused epidemics then what caused births gone bad, babies to died at birth, women to die giving birth, babies to died after being born, why did women fill out a will prior to give birth due to not knowing that outcome. Midwives have been around to help almost as long as women giving birth have. Yet things still went wrong.
How is natural better, when natural is all there ever used to be. Yet, things still went wrong. Birth was dangerous, birth was scary. Granted it is an exaggeration but in "period movies" the most common explanation of man's tragedy is his wife dying in childbirth. Why? Because it is realistic. It was and is common. You mostly hear of successful home births and birthing center experiences. Yet there are just as many sad outcomes.
PLEASE STOP being so judgmental of others. Make your decisions confidently and with faith in God and STOP judging other people's methods.

Couple of links in favor of vaccinations, just some food for thought. The "double standard" link is not  jab, but it is certainly a comeback to the popular double standard post aimed at pro vaccinators.

http://thelogicofscience.com/2015/07/13/10-hypocrisiesdouble-standards-of-the-anti-vaccine-movement/

http://www.bluntmoms.com/hey-non-vaccinators-youre-welcome/

Friday, August 14, 2015

Guilty or Not Guilty?

Just some food for thought. But, it is extremely odd that all of a sudden 50 women with similar stories are all suddenly coming forward and accusing Bill Cosby. It is interesting that some of these women have inconsistencies in their stories. Some of these women claim to have accepted money from him, let him pay their bills, voluntarily took pills that he "gave to them" and also none of these women (irrelevant if they were believed or not) went and had a rape test done to have some proof that they did take action at the time of the crimes. It is also very interesting that MANY people take offense to Bill Cosby (due to what he or what we thought he stood for). I am not going to downplay that rape is often brushed under the rug and never dealt with. However, wealthy people are often victims of lies and conspiracies, especially wealthy people that are outspoken. I am not taking sides, however because these women waited so long to suddenly speak up and because they took no action to have proof of what happened then I don't think even with a trial that I could ever truly say. It is entirely possible that someone seriously dislikes Cosby enough to have an agenda against him. To offer to pay women to be on it. It is not uncommon to try and crush someone's legacy.
 I also find it hard to believe that a show that ran for a decade where Cosby had a busy life with his on screen family, that none of these people saw any suspicious behavior. If he truly was as promiscuous as they say.
If he truly did this, I pity those women. But I also criticize them. They should have spoke up, they should have made a stand, they should have gone to a hospital and had a rape test done and filed. Even if it wasn't believe then, if a string of women were to consistently do this and have actual proof. Then it would not be hard to bring this sort of thing down.
You should not fear not being believed when you have spoken up and taken a stand. You should fear not believed because you never made the effort to be believed.
My final comment is to those that think because in interviews he has been quoted as saying "I don't want to talk about that" if he indeed didn't do it, then I can see why he wouldn't want to talk about it. To have the image that he has had for so long and suddenly see it crumble. I would be offended and annoyed to hear the question. Also, it is disrespectful and in bad taste for journalism to use an interview for an art exhibit to get Hollywood gossip out of the accused, especially after having requested that it not be brought up.
If he is wrong, I hope justice is served. If he is not, he is owed an apology.
Interesting blog post that helps give perspective to both sides
http://thyblackman.com/2014/10/21/is-bill-cosby-guilty-of-hurting-women-its-more-complex-than-you-might-think/

Thursday, August 6, 2015

Parenting 101 from a Single Married Person

I know this is going to sound like mute point to some and to others it will be a sign of comfort that someone else has noticed but WHAT THE CRAP IS IT WITH MODERN PARENTING and THEIR BRATS?
Every time I go to the store I see some mom struggling with kids. Now, I am not being a cynic and saying in general "struggling with kids" I mean literally struggling. She is trying to push a cart and grab groceries, meanwhile her wild animals...er....I mean sweet innocent children are wreaking havoc on the store and it's other shoppers. It doesn't matter what she says they just continue on. Everything from bumping into other shoppers, not moving out of the way, knocking stuff off the shelves, etc. you name it they're doing it. Yet, the mom has either no assertiveness in her voice when she (more often IF) she corrects and then other times it's over assertiveness making her sound weak and frustrating, leaving the kids with the notion that it is time to "go in for the kill", "finish her off", "Take out the weak one of the pack", you get where I am going with this. No RESPECT. No ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of her authority.  So, where does it come from? No child is born this way. Therefore, the fault is with the parent.
First of all teaching your kids manners is more than just "Yes ma'am, No ma'am" and "Yes sir, No sir". They can just as easily be respectfully disrespectful.
Example: If you have told your child to do something and they look at you and say "no", don't correct them and say "You do not say no, you say no ma'am". I'm sorry, but really? You're just asking for it, in fact I will go a step further you deserve it! Don't give them permission to disrespect you. It should be "Do NOT tell me no, you say yes ma'am". Saying it that way doesn't leave them with thoughts of an ultimatum. BTW, I know you probably think that the words I am using don't come into a child's head and your right not these specific words. But, yes they are thinking of these methods and processes, which leads me to secondly.
Secondly, DON'T underestimate your child. They are not stupid, they're just disrespectful hooligans that have somehow begun to rule your life. Just relate it to Planet of the Apes. They watch and learn and mostly importantly remember.
Next up "child proofing your home" note I didn't say "baby proof" I said "child proof". REALLY? On what sick planet did you grow up? My parents didn't baby proof anything, let alone child proof. I cannot begin to tell you how many facebook posts I saw last year of Christmas literally falling over (due to meddling) and women who have come up with the idea to decorate their tree in all plastic ornaments until the kids are old enough to not break the nice pretty delicate glass ones. Of course if you comment on any these you leave yourself wide open for the classic line "you'll understand when you have kids". Yes, I will understand. I will understand that while you are putting a plastic tree to avoid disaster that I will be still be enjoying my vintage glass ball and hallmark ornament tree. Why take the risk? Because, as soon as you hide the delicate items in your house and stop putting out your pretty things because you don't want them broken, you open a door to a whole new problem. You have just enabled your child. You have given them the realization that they can do whatever they want. When you child proof your home and then take your kids to someone else's home and something gets broken BECAUSE of your child's BAD MANNERS this is not the fault of the people who don't have a child proof home.
My mother had five children. She didn't have kids for the first 2 years of marriage. Once she did, she never stopped putting out her 5 glass nativities at Christmas or decorating her Christmas tree with hundreds of glass balls, or setting out her delicate German made nutcrackers, or placing her hand painted ceramic Santa on the floor by the fireplace......GASP on the floor! Oh my, you live dangerously. No, not really. She just lived in reality. The reality that she is boss and we lived with the understanding that if we broke something that weren't supposed to be touching to begin with, our lives were in her hands.
Yet, friends would come over and their child would break something of my mom's (which did happen at least once) and the response from the parent is that "you shouldn't keep breakable things out and in child's reach". WRONG! Not only would I expect a greater response from the parent of the unruly child, I expect compensation and I sure as heck don't want to be corrected in my own home where my own kids have never broken any of my precious items.

So fourthly, "Is My Child a Brat?". Well first of all babies learn fast. They know what they can get away with and when they can get away with it. Like crying, if you pay attention very shortly into the early mother stages you will notice that baby cries because it needs something and then not much later in the mothering stage, you will noticed that they cry also be cause they WANT something. WANT and NEED are not the same at all. As soon as that child is not crying because they have a dirty diaper, or because they are hungry, or because they are sleepy it is time to take action. By this I mean, let them cry it out. Don't pick them up and soothe them just for the sake of soothing them. You are beginning to enable them as soon as you start this bad habit.
If you let your child poor milk on the floor at home and stomp through it and make a mess then they are no doubt going to do this at someone else's home. If you let them pick up things that aren't theirs and hit and smash it against other stuff, then they will do that at other people's home. If you take away all things that you don't want damaged, then will go ape crazy at someone else's home. Don't make your children unbearable for other people to be around. Sure, some of your stuff will probably get broken in the learning process. However, very shortly you will notice that you are able to have a pretty centerpiece in the middle of the coffee table instead of sticky handprints, legos and empty sippy cups. There is a perfectly good floor surrounding the tiny island of "COFFEE TABLE". The floor is the ocean where you can take your speed boats and jet skis and be obnoxious, the coffee table is the all inclusive resort where the adults go, NO CHILDREN ALLOWED. Know the boundaries, teach the boundaries and enforce the boundaries.
Complain about the entire house being covered with toys and all things child related? STOP. They don't have their own freaking bedroom just to have a place to sleep. This is their domain. Toys, books, clothes, all forms of messiness stays in that room. The house doesn't belong to them, they don't pay the bills. Make them respect it and in return your children will be friggin joy for other people to be around not just you. What a blessing that would be.
Lastly technology. Really people? Go outside and play waterguns, cowboys and Indians, turn that troll house into a GI Joe fort, have a Barbie fashion show. No child needs a kindle, ipad, ipadmini, airpad, nookie, littlenookie, and whatever else it is that they have out for kids now. The bottom line is you are going to tell yourself that you are buying this for your child because it is "educational" or "they only get to use it for educational games" or the excuse of "it's no different than watching tv" and the list goes on. The bottom line is you are getting this for your child so they will have something to keep them "out of your hair for a while" something to plug them into while at a guest's house or at social events, something to occupy them while in the car. WRONG. These are the best times and the best ways to start that early education. If they start out with these pieces of technology it WILL impair their ability to communicate and to have a mature conversation. It WILL make them unsocial (you think homeschooling makes people unsocial, try giving a 3 year old an ipad). I was shy as child and didn't talk to my peers much. But, when I was 13 I could have full on conversations with an 80 year old at a nursing home. I knew how to talk and how to carry on a mature conversation.
So you want your child to learn to read quickly? Give them a book? NO not a KINDLE, a book? Ever heard of it? Oh, I'm sorry you probably couldn't hear me, you gave all your attention to page 100 of Fifty Shades of Grey ON YOUR KINDLE! Get off the kindle! and on that note get a life, read a real book. Ok sorry getting off track sometimes I forget that the modern adults are as bad as the little children.
No, your child doesn't need a phone at the age of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, even 10. Phones come into necessity at age 16 when they are having to get jobs and start driving. I personally don't want my child's first photo be a "selfie".
Ok, rant over!





Friday, March 6, 2015

No to Dogs, Yes to Kids.....

Good Morning! I know everyone is thinking Yay for Friday! I hear ya, very exciting weekend to look forward. Parents are coming for a visit and Monday we will start the closing on our house :).
Speaking of homes, how many of you have dogs/cats? How many of you have kids? How many of you have both? How many of you allow kids but won't allow dogs/cats in the house?
I totally get the people that don't have kids and don't allow pets in the house. Makes sense, germ freaks, control freaks, or just plain clean freaks. But what about parents that have kids but don't want dogs in the house? Cats I kind of understand (obviously not a cat person). I think the whole litter box thing is disgusting and to top it off cats tear everything unless they are declawed.  Plus they can jump and get places that dogs can't. But hey, to each their own.
Back to not allowing pets in the house, but kids are ok? So, reasons?
Dogs have accidents in the house
Dogs shed hair
Dogs get fleas
Dogs need to be taken outside to potty, which is annoying
Dogs, when walking you have to pick up their doo doo and place in bag to dispose of
Dogs chew stuff
Dogs tear stuff up
Dogs are messy
Dogs are high maintenance
Dog Sitters

Ok, so think about all of those reasons and think about what your child does
Kids have accidents in the house ALL OF THE TIME 24/7 actually
Kids don't shed hair but they do pick their nose and wipe stuff on stuff amongst other nasty habits
Kids don't get fleas, but they can get lice.
Kids have to be taken to the bathroom when they need to potty or diaper changed, whichever stage you are at
Kids have to have their diapers changed and disposed of when out and about
Kids chew stuff
Kids tear stuff up
Kids are messy
Kids can be very high maintenance
Kids need baby sitters

WOW, everything sounds so similar. What does it all lead to in my point? My point is some people have dogs first others have kids first, and just because someone has dogs instead of kids doesn't mean you should make it difficult for the owners.
If you have kids in the house and your reasons for no dogs in the house match any of the reasons above, then your an idiot. It is unfair and unreasonable to have friends (that have dogs) to come over and are expected to leave their dogs at home or at a kennel because you don't like dogs in the house.
Meanwhile, your 4 years old just spilt a glass of milk on the new couch, the 2 year old just stuck their hand in their diaper then ran their hand down the hallway wall. Yeah. I see your point. Dogs are sooooo much worse.......
Another note, the excuse "I just don't like dogs". Doesn't fly with me either. I don't necessarily like kids, but I am not about to tell you that when you come over you have leave them at home or they have to stay in the car. I mean come on? Really?

All I am asking is that people think before they react and make a rule. It has to be legit rule and reason, like I am allergic to dogs, or your dog doesn't do well with kids, and we just had a baby, etc.

Just food for thought!


Tuesday, March 3, 2015

All in Favor of NOT living in Texas

Ok, so I am sure most people know how hard it is to find "negative" things about Texas online or in conversation with Texans. BTW, I am have lived in Texas all my life and have noticeably hated it since I was 13. About the age when you start realizing important things. Not when is the next Buccees stop, BBQ get togethers, having to drive 30 minutes for take out food, etc.
I have lived near two major cities in Texas. An hour from Houston and 45 minutes from San Antonio. So opposite ends of the spectrum. Both what people consider relatively close to the gulf coast (not what it is hyped up to be). I have worked in a small town and a medium small town. Both gave me huge insights on Texas culture that just can't be ignored. The main one (hidden behind all of that false redneck pride), IGNORANCE.
People don't move here because it is beautiful, awesome weather, scenic, pleasant people. They move here because they want a job (and think we magically provide it and we do.....for all of the illegal immigrants that make up for more than half of the population) and because it is cheaper. Well, ok. You wanted to live someone cheaper, then be prepared for cheap. Cheap culture, cheap quality and cheap morals.
San Augustine (lived most of my life) population: less than 5,000. Couldn't wait to move. The blunt and very obvious reason to not live in Texas. The next biggest town is Nacogdoches (conveniently people nick name it "Nasty Toe Cheese") Between every major city in Texas is about 40 billion (exaggeration) of the small, miserable and down right creepy small towns and communities. Seriously driving anywhere in Texas at night, I make sure my tank is full of gasoline because trust me you don't want to stop at any of these towns.
Kerrville, the next lovely location I chose to move to after marrying my husband. Biggest mistake ever (not the marriage, the town). Population: 22,000. So bigger than I was used to but with even smaller minds and even larger number of registered sex offenders. BTW, Kerrville (Texas Hill Country) is supposedly this amazing, beautiful location that everyone wants to vacation at, retire to, move to. DON'T. Unless you want an endless supply of creepos, breakfast tacos, low quality tex mex (don't even see how that is possible when you live right next door to Mexico) and rednecks. Please don't get me started on one of the huge advertisements for this area: The Guadalupe River. In a few words, it is the nastiest water you won't want to dip your toes into. My husband and I invested in a pool that last 2 years we lived there just so we could survive the MISERABLE Texas summers (which btw last all but one month of the year) and so at the same time didn't have to worry about getting a disease from the river water. Seriously, we swam in the pool from April till October. And seriously don't move here if you expect to find a decent home in a decent area for a decent price. Welcome to the Hill Country you get to live in a stone home surrounded but dust, rocks and sticks. So pleasant.
Huntsville: location after we finally made the best decision ever, to move from Kerrville. Population 34,000 and growing. Obviously it's only an hour from Houston. So far love it. It is pretty, there is a lot of green and lots of hills and turns. Actually a nice variety of restaurants (not the greatest but hey they have something other Denny's and taco shops if you should decide to go enjoy a Sunday morning breakfast.) Stores to shop for groceries other than Wal-Mart and HEB. A huge plus. In Kerrville, heaven help you if you decide to get a few quickie groceries from HEB, rush hour that makes driving thru Houston traffic look pleasant. And funny that it should be an hour from Houston and close to 15,000 more people and yet has 30 less mapped sex offenders than Kerrville.
Obviously, like everywhere in Texas it too will be over populated and miserable. In the meantime I am happy to bide my time living here until we can move out of Texas. I can actually walk my dogs in my neighborhood without feeling the need to have pepper spray and a large stick. My previous neighborhood in Kerrville was a little L street with 12 houses and I was terrified to even walk from one end to the other. Another plus, when I go to the grocery store people actually smile and greet you and carry on conversation with you when checking out. Something I missed for 3 years. There is something going on all the time, so if we choose to do something there is always access to something. My husband and I have done more in the 6 months of living here than we did in 3 years in Kerrville.

I am having difficulty finding negatives but I know that I will start spotting them and identifying them.

Anyways found some forums and blogs sharing my opinions, have some wine and enjoy:

http://shemovedtotexasblessherheart.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=3

http://www.experienceproject.com/stories/Hate-Texas/702146



Friday, February 27, 2015

Kid Friendly TV........But is it Adult Friendly?

So I haven't blogged in a while, things have been busy around here. But, something has caught my attention.....the things that do and don't approve of for their children to watch.
So spongebob......you would think would be the inappropriate list and oddly enough it isn't. In fact in same paragraphs a parent will say they approve of spongebob but absolutely no to South Park and The Simpsons. At least with South Park you are learning sarcastic truth about life. What do kids learn from Spongebob other than nasty jokes and the digression of their speech abilities.
A parent once posted on Facebook that she was "needing suggestions for new kid's movies". Thinking nothing of it, I suggested Rango. My opinion of the movie was that it was funny, intelligent, and though their was some mild language in it (something I highly doubt your child hasn't already been subjected to and if they haven't they should be, I am not a fan of sheltering) and the mom replied back "I have seen Rango, and don't find it appropriate for children". Following my suggestion were movies like Tangled and Veggie Tales.
Why are parents so intent on allowing their child to watch shows and movies that don't do anything for their child's brain other than lull it to sleep and silence? Why can't parents learn the fine line between inappropriate and educational? Growing up we were allowed to watch movies with scary stuff in it and a little bit of mild language. In a way we were weened into it. We never cussed as children or got scared from movies. Parents today are so afraid of this possibility that they shelter their children completely from it and then once their child has unsupervised access to it, they go ape crazy. Self inflicted by the parents for sheltering their child to begin with.
I saw a blog post recently where a guy made a list of 20 inappropriate movies for children and he actually listed the Disney Robin Hood (you know the one with the characters played by animals). Did I miss something?
Something else that gets me is Veggie Tales. Why would you encourage your child to be sucked into Veggie Tales? Oh, and please spare me the "It's a Christian educational cartoon" speech. Honestly the same parents that promote those movies are bashing superhero shows, saying they are unrealistic and noneducational. So a singing vegetable is realistic and a guy with a cape that can fly is not?

Hmmmmmmmm. Yeah, totally makes sense.
Do any of these shows ring a bell?
Teletubbies
Dora the Explorer
Barney
The Wiggles
Rug Rats

Why would any parent in their right mind let their child watch these? One a show I remember distinctly not being allow to watch was "Barney". Looking back, I totally understand why.
Another memory I have as a child was being about 7 years old and some friends from church came other and were not allowed to watch The Muppet Christmas Carol with us because the ghost of Christmas future might scare them. Yet, you go over to this same women's home and she will show a birthing video to the same children saying it is "educational" HUH?!?!?! Did I miss something?

Finally the latest rage.....Frozen. I am so SICK TO DEATH of that movie and all the hype about it. Forcing myself to watch that movie was like a suicide attempt. Worst plot in the world, stupid obnoxious songs and the whole thing is about some stupid sister relationship? huh? The only reason I wanted to see it was because of the cute snowman (who was barely in it). This is something parents actively support for the children? I would rather my kids be watching the classic horror films like Frankenstein, The Wolf Man and Creature of the Black Lagoon. Which we did watch at a very young age when I was growing up and yet again no nightmares, and best of all...... no delusions about life.
Ok, off my soap box now.
Parents, consider the growth of your child's mind. Instead of sheltering it try give it more room. One day that child will grow up to be an adult. Believe it or not, what they watch now will affect how the behave, react and handle life once they are released on their own.