Little Miss Perfect/Toddlers and Tiaras

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

What if they were interested in something that doesn't necessarily translate into fame or notoriety?

I missed opening this thread after this response...

Can you name something that falls into this category? The best in every field achieve fame/notoriety to some extent. From MVP athletes to Grammy winning musicians to Nobel Prize winning scientist to best-selling authors. Different types and levels of course. And saying I'd like to set my kids up to be Olympians or Tony winners or the next Michelangelo doesn't mean I EXPECT that of them, it means I'm like every parent who wants their child to achieve their best. If they happen to be good enough to take that talent to the next level, I want to help them nurture it. I would hate for them to find something they love and are good at when they're too old to just be starting out and be competitive. Most of the time when someone does achieve "the next level", you hear stories of how they've been at it since they were 3.

If they grow up and decide they want to be teachers or lawyers or carpenters or stay-at-home parents, that's perfectly fine, and I didn't mean to sound like I was implying otherwise. I just want to give them the opportunities they deserve.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Most of the time when someone does achieve "the next level", you hear stories of how they've been at it since they were 3.

Which means that they sacrifice a very large number of normal childhood experiences to be the best. Malcolm Gladwell wrote about 10,000 hours being the standard for becoming an "expert" at something. That's an awful lot of time.

This isn't to say there aren't people for whom it isn't a sacrifice, but they are their own kind of particular genius, I think (Glenn Gould comes to mind). Rare is the child who really wants to give up normal kid stuff to be a concert virtuoso.

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I missed opening this thread after this response...

Can you name something that falls into this category? The best in every field achieve fame/notoriety to some extent. From MVP athletes to Grammy winning musicians to Nobel Prize winning scientist to best-selling authors. Different types and levels of course. And saying I'd like to set my kids up to be Olympians or Tony winners or the next Michelangelo doesn't mean I EXPECT that of them, it means I'm like every parent who wants their child to achieve their best. If they happen to be good enough to take that talent to the next level, I want to help them nurture it. I would hate for them to find something they love and are good at when they're too old to just be starting out and be competitive. Most of the time when someone does achieve "the next level", you hear stories of how they've been at it since they were 3.

If they grow up and decide they want to be teachers or lawyers or carpenters or stay-at-home parents, that's perfectly fine, and I didn't mean to sound like I was implying otherwise. I just want to give them the opportunities they deserve.

I didn't see this until now.

I guess I initially read that sentence as sort of contradictory, but I can see how you are meaning it. How this ties into the T&T discussion - and I am not being snarky, read on.

If you are "setting up" your children to be world-recognized athletes or performers, how can you not have that expectation? In other words (and I am not saying that you do it, but we see it all the time on T&T), what is the expected result of hours upon hours of preparation and lots of money on equipment/training - at a level beyond what most children do as a hobby? And what if that doesn't "pay off"?

Have you seen Micky Wood (mother of Eden Wood, a popular kiddie pageant girl) interviewed? She talks about the "big two million dollar contract" that is going to get her and Eden out of Arkansas and to Hollywood. Sure, her kid can strut around and smile like a trained monkey, but how that will translate into "success" is unclear. Unless simply having a name that people recognize for no real contribution to the world (a la the Kardashians or the Jersey Shore people) is the goal.

These parents on the pageant shows honestly believe that they are setting their kids up for "ultimate success," a.k.a, FAME!! and FORTUNE!!, and proclaim that they'd do anything for their kid to "win." Two points to that - what if the kid isn't as talented as they expect or want them to be, in a particular area, second, what if the kid with talent and all that training and money spent, doesn't "win"?

It's a fine line, but I think "stage momism" is easy to spot when I see it. (Not saying you do it, because honestly, I only know what you share on your links there, but these crazy parents on T&T are on par with the Hockey dads that beat up the dads of the opposing team.)

[AlphaFrog]

^^I see what you mean now about my wording, but I wouldn't ever take anything like that for my kids beyond hobby level unless they initiated it. Even the modeling/acting between all of our jobs and my scholarship, we've probably broken even after investments in photoshoots, comp cards, showcase, etc.

Hilariously enough, I literally JUST NOW got a casting notice for the new season of Dance Moms from my agent. LOL

[BetteDavisEyes]

New episodes of Toddlers & Tiaras start tomorrow! Woohoo!

I was missing seeing these insane moms & dads and bratty children. LOL!

[AlphaFrog]

http://www.babble.com/interview/davi...d-development/

Read this today and thought of the issues I brought up in this thread. Great article for people struggling with what the heck to do with your kids. I may end up getting the book the article mentions.

[KSUViolet06]

*That backdrop of this pageant is pretty janky.

*I like how grandma says "I know she hasn't been on stage in 8 months, but I still expect her to bring home the highest title." Of course you can expect that when YOU aren't the one doing it.

*If your child can't function on stage without you miming the routine from the audience, she's too young for a pageant. That bugs me. I can see if your kid is like 10, and can do it all herself, cool let her do it. But what's the point of having a 2 year old on stage who is lost? lol.

*I think it's funny that with the under 2 year olds, it seems that the winner is most likely to be the kid who doesn't cry/try to run away/etc. I've heard that it's the same way with babies and modeling, a lot of times it's not the cutest baby at the casting call, but the one who can sit there long enough without crying.

*I get that the pageant requires you to make a costume or something. Cool. But why can't it be age appropriate? Like, your kid can be (for example) a beach princess or something without her stomach being out like she's 16.

*This really goes for any activity a kid is in, but what exactly are you teaching your kid when you have OUTBURSTS and using the word loser over and over like a 5 year old? That's not losing gracefully (which was the #1 point of everything I participated in as a kid.)

*Also, it's my understanding that Ultimate Grand Supreme is the highest title of most of the pageants, right? Why do the parents FREAK OUT when their kids don't win it? That's like when you go to a gymnastics meet and you FREAK OUT when your kid isn't the gold medalist or high point. If you've been doing this for awhile, you should kind of know that you can't win 'em all.

[BetteDavisEyes]

The mom who had the meltdown b/c her daughter won Princess & Novice Supreme was a royal biotch. She seriously disgusted me.

The pageant grandma was another in a long line of irritating pageant parents who demand their kids win the biggest titles & then express their anger b/c their snowflake didn't win.