Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Other subjects

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Flip

1 2 ··· 30 31 32 33 34 35

Original poster

For all who want GF banned from MN - so does she!!

857 replies

mummygow · 11/05/2006 18:41

As you are all prob aware I follow the Gf routine and am also on her website and this was posted for us to see.

Dear Members,

In response to your emails regarding the statement in The Times Newspaper on 9th May 2006. We would like to confirm that neither Gina or her lawyers have put pressure on Mumsnet regarding the criticism that her methods receive on their forums. Gina was forced to seek legal
advice regarding other very serious issues with Mumsnet, and we will in the near future make a public statement as to her reasons for this. It would appear that some Mumsnet members are demanding a ban of the
Gina Ford name on the site. Gina herself would welcome this, as her forthcoming statement will confirm, she has for very valid reasons, no wish to be associated with the Mumsnet site.

OP posts:

Blunderwoman · 14/05/2006 23:22

P.S. GF has a new book out. Did you know?

Any publicity is good publicity eh! Anyone gonna buy it?

harpsichordcarrier · 14/05/2006 23:24

"breastfeeding saboteurs"
lol hunker
and at the same time
with more than a bit of

Blunderwoman · 14/05/2006 23:26

Has anyone actually successfully followed GF's CLBB? Would anyone recommend it to their best mate?

(Or would you rather give it to someone you really didn't like?!)

arfy · 14/05/2006 23:26

god I was lucky that I ignored all kinds of 'helpful' feeding advice and got on with it, supplemented with reading things on mumsnet

otherwise I'd have been well and truly sabotaged too

alexsmum · 14/05/2006 23:27

sorry-i didn't catch who it was who asked if ezzo babies get lots of hugs-one of his beliefs is that mother and baby shouldn't get too attached as that leads to child abuse.

arfy · 14/05/2006 23:27

oh lots of people follow CLBB quite happily.

It suited a couple of my (breastfeeding) friends. But then, as has been said on here before, dig a little deeper and they didn't follow it to the letter - I still haven't found anyone that got up at 6.45 to express!

arfy · 14/05/2006 23:28

alexsmum - really?

Think I'm going to have to stop reading about him

alexsmum · 14/05/2006 23:29

ruty that makes me feel better about co-sleeping with ds1 until he was 3!!!!

Blunderwoman · 14/05/2006 23:31

I'm going to bed now but as a parting shot, can't MN be formatted so that any thread or post referring in any way, shape or form to GF books, methods, website or the person be immediately deleted??

LittleSarah · 14/05/2006 23:36

Okay... hmmm.

I read GF - enough of it anyway - to decide it was not for me in any way, shape or form (I was a thrower/burner in disgust type I am afraid). Far too regimented, etc. I am much more of a go with the flow kind of girl... still each to their own I always thought. But still, reccommending formula instead of breast milk in an evening? Or leaving a child for 3 hours. Nope. V bad.

Still, I tried not to be mean about GF's methods... until this fiasco!

What is this craziness all about? It can't really be about a swearing thread, that is ludicrous, a cover, I am assuming, for the real issue.

Which is? What? Exactly? Getting bitched about I am sure... or am I?

No. I am confused. F**king confused.

alexsmum · 15/05/2006 00:56

oh my bloody god.was just reading one of those lists of books'not to read'.one of them is called how to train achild up, by michael pearl.his theory is to smack achild with a switch right from thembeing babies so that they learn to obey
but not only that, you should deliberately put interesting things in their way so that they want to touch them-then when they do, hit them.that way they learn not to touch.if they bite then pull their hair etc etc.i feel like i want to vomit after reading this.
to think that people are reading this shit and thinking that it's agood way to behave makes me want to cry.

Caligula · 15/05/2006 01:04

But who are the people who read these books by these child-abuse enthusiasts and then decide to follow the programme? They must be very credulous and damaged people to begin with. The idea of hitting a baby is just so counter to all our instincts that these loons are obviously talking to an audience of extremely vulnerable people.

Filyjonk · 15/05/2006 07:50

Was going to suggest a new swear word, ezzo off.

but the whole thing is too fucking sad to joke about.

have never understood why any sane, well adjusted god would want to be feared, anyway.

let alone beat up and starve tiny children.

think ezzo might have got it a bit wrong.

Twiglett · 15/05/2006 08:35

I think its astounding that one needs no experience, training, understanding, qualifications to become a so-called 'childcare expert' and to have parents, sometimes desperate parents, follow your words to the letter.

I think all you need is a niche ... once you find that niche that has some semblance of credence .. ie with Ezzo it appears to be founded in a link to 'religion', however incorrectly... you then have a pulpit from which to spout whatever rubbish enters your head.

Link that with a pseudo-medical history (wife being a registered nurse / caring for other people's babies) and you have an 'expert'

Experts on raising babies are either trained for years with full medical / psychiatric knowledge .. or are trained for years as parents .. even then they all have different views and are moulded by their experiences

I am saddened and disgusted by these adults who profess to be childcare experts ... totally disgusted .. I am stunned that these philosophies have earned them a single cent .. I am in despair at the state of our society in the western world when we have broken down the extended family to such an extent that these 'experts' can hold greater sway than our own parents / grandparents and our own experiences

morningpaper · 15/05/2006 09:48

I came from a very conservative christian community and the belief that you should smack children and babies was very ingrained. It comes from the Biblical proverb "Spare the rod and spoil the child" which was interpreted to mean that a child who was not smacked was ill-disciplined and spoiled. It DOES seem extreme but again, it is another counter-liberal-baby-led-culture (just like GF is) and should be seen in that light. Most of our grandparents would have believed a similar thing. It DOES sound harsh but it was basically the way things were done two generations ago.

harpsichordcarrier · 15/05/2006 13:48

well I am not sure that I know of any culture where it was the norm to hit babies tbh mp
certainly not the UK in living memory

Filyjonk · 15/05/2006 14:26

Thank god we live 2 generations on, eh mp!

now I think of it, wasn't it legal to hit and rape your wife 2 generations ago? And display signs saysing "no irish, dogs or blacks?"

I really hope that in 2 more generations we will have got beyond this whole "babies need to be controlled" approach.

harpsichordcarrier · 15/05/2006 14:27

actually, Filyjonk, it was still legal to rape your wife 16 years ago, when I was taught criminal law

Filyjonk · 15/05/2006 14:31

ah yes, R v R.

It wasn't legal 6 years ago when I was doing criminal law

Am pleased to see you are giving your arms a rest btw.

Caligula · 15/05/2006 14:34

Yes hasn't it always been slightly taboo to hit anyone under about 2?

Wasn't there once a mad thread where someone asked "when is the right age to start smacking?" Or am I making that up? Anyway, the point is, is that even for parents who believe in smacking as a valid method of discipline, there has always been general agreement even among the childphobic WASP societies, that smacking a baby is not an appropriate thing to do at any time.

Blu · 15/05/2006 15:07

Michael Pearl and his wife Debi should be arrested, imo.

This is how he talks of a child under the age of ONE:

"As I was writing this I was interrupted by a child screaming. Deb is baby-sitting an eleven-month-old little boy. I let him scream for about five minutes, as I wrote the last lines of the above paragraph, and then I left my office and went to investigate. Deb was doing business on the phone—talking to a missionary, long distance. The child was clawing at the back door, trying to get it open so he could go outside. I picked up a switch and walked over to where he was conducting his scream-in. In a calm but firm voice I said, "No, stop crying." I didn’t expect him to respond, but I wanted to establish the rules. When he failed to respond, I switched him twice on the only exposed skin—about three inches between his sock and pants leg. Again he did what I expected, what he does when his mother swats him—scream in defiance. But I have seen her swat him, and it never even gets his attention, other than a signal to scream louder. But when I switched his bare skin, he looked shocked and started to rub it. He continued to cry in protest, so I gave him two more licks on the bare leg. This time, he was convinced that I meant business. I know that he understood the issue, because he crawled past me, away from the door. Again I commanded him to stop crying, brandishing the switch. He stopped crying immediately, continuing to rub his leg while staring at me."

There are worse things on his site too. Written THIS MILENNIUM.

(But I don't think this has anything to do with g f or other child-care commentators)

Jessajam · 15/05/2006 15:14

ProfYaffle · 15/05/2006 15:26

Oh my f*cking Lord

zippitippitoes · 15/05/2006 15:31

that is sick

in this country that would be against the law..which country are they in

Filyjonk · 15/05/2006 15:31

fucking animals [angry}

that is out and out child abuse.

Flip

1 2 ··· 30 31 32 33 34 35

Swipe left for the next trending thread