Pockets and Socks, Shoes

Why do babies need socks &/or shoes if they can’t walk? I can understand having socks in the winter time, but during the warmer months… WHY?! They fall off and that’s all they do!

I suppose people think they’re cute. I guess I can admit that, but the practicality of it! Why would a baby have ANY business wearing socks or, especially, shoes?! They can NOT walk! OK, I’m done with the exclamation points, but be honest, can you think of a valid reason for a baby to wear socks/shoes during the warmer months?

Why do toddlers need pockets when there’s nothing in the world they could possibly need to carry in them? THEY think that there are things worth carrying in them, but they’re wrong. Your child does NOT need to stuff their pockets with dirt, coins, frogs, money (e.g. Starburst wrappers), real U.S. dollar bills (which they equate with Starburst wrappers), or even their hands which are sticky with jelly or whatever else they miraculously rub all over their hands.

This is getting so STUPID… (doesn’t an exclamation point fit there?)

Yes, it does. This is getting so STUPID!

I’m referring to the lengths to which we’ll go to make our children look more act like us before they need to.  There are New Year’s Eve parties for children which end at 2000 hours! (I guess I’m not through with the exclamation points, sorry). Children who have parents who love them just don’t even GET the concept of a New Year. Why would they really care what year it is? All that they care about is the candy or the date of their birth in that year (or if they have the types of parents who don’t get it – staying up late). Also, we let our children go on dates, wear two piece swimsuits aka bikinis, and even go to inappropriate events (e.g. the types of wedding receptions where everyone is expected to stick around while the groom takes the garter off of his bride).

I suppose I should explain that last part. Children should NOT go on dates. They don’t need to. I’m hoping that none of my children will date, but that they’ll court. What a strange world we’d live in if boys (in this strange world we’d refer to them as “gentleman callers”) would introduce himself to the father of the girl he’s interested in. From there it would be the father who would decide if the gentleman caller is an appropriate person for his daughter to MARRY. That’s right, MARRY. That’s because dating is often compared to marriage followed by divorce over and over again. There isn’t a good relationship (or, more often, any at all) between the boy and the father of the girl he’s dating. I suppose there’s a correlation there. Young women who have good relationships with their fathers more often don’t have sex outside of marriage. If there isn’t a (good) relationship between the girl and her father then there’s definitely not going to be one (if at all) between the boy that dates the girl and her father. You might think it’s stupid or outdated, but are Sexually Transmitted Diseases or emotional turmoil really smarter or so up-to-date that you’d want to sacrifice your daughter’s modesty for looking like the rest of the world?

As for two piece swimsuits… I HATE it when I see little girls wearing two piece swimsuits. I’ve heard it said that the level of modesty (based on) what you wear depends on where it directs the eyes of those who look at you. So if a woman wears something that shows the sides of her breasts or even (much) of the tops of them… the eyes of those who look at her will most likely fall below her eye level and begin to gaze into her cleavage. I have to say I don’t want to be legalistic. I want those of you reading to know that modesty is in the woman, not what the woman wears. While it’s the responsibility of the woman to choose what she wears, it’s the responsibility of the man to choose where he looks. That said, I hope I haven’t offended anyone (… ever) by where I’ve looked (though I doubt it… since I’m a sinner – shocking, I’m sure). Anyway, little girls don’t have the parts (typically) for two piece swimsuits. Even when the parts become present, why direct those who look at you to it? At some point I’ll blog about the history of swimsuits (again, keeping in mind the fact that I’m not trying to be legalistic, but look how far we’ve come/gone). But this is all just opinion.

As for wedding receptions and what happens… it’s the same issue. Our children don’t need to think about these things at their age.

So… my questions for today are:

  • Can you think of a good reason for babies to wear socks/shoes (not health reasons)?
  • Is there a good reason for children to have pockets?
  • What’s the strangest thing(s) you’ve found in the pocket of your children?
  • Have you allowed your (young) children to stay up for the New Year and, despite my understanding of the situation, you believe letting them stay up until midnight was a loving thing to do?
  • What do you believe about courting? Is it outdated? Do you have a good relationship with your daughter despite courting and know they’re celibate? How? Letting your daughter date does seem easier… is it possible I’m wrong on this?
  • Do you have a good reason to allow your little girl to wear a two piece swimsuit? I don’t want to be wrong on this issue, really. If there’s a good reason I should be sensitive to let me know.
This entry was posted in Fatherhood. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Pockets and Socks, Shoes

  1. Pingback: The Lord’s Supper with Coke and Chips | ZOT

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s