TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . DONATE . CONTACT . CHAT  
                  Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
Archive through October 13, 2009

Reality TVClubHouse Discussions: Other Reality Shows ARCHIVES: Archives for 2009 - 3: Jon & Kate ARCHIVES: Archive through October 13, 2009 users admin

Author Message
Tishala
Member

08-01-2000

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:27 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Tishala a private message Print Post    
I feel just the opposite. I remember fondly the episode in which Jon made the Korean dinner (Mrs Gosselin finally allowed him into the kitchen!) and the kids started arguing about who was more Asian! Those children have always been attached to their father, who is less concerned with controlling them and more concerned about letting them become individuals. It's a beautiful thing to watch.

Angelicfairies2
Member

07-19-2004

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:31 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Angelicfairies2 a private message Print Post    
Agree Tishala. Kate controls those kids to much which when older they will all resent her and then what is she going to do?
Kate looked like a mad woman today at the court. WOW those eyes. CRAZY

Glenrie
Member

03-24-2006

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:35 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Glenrie a private message Print Post    
ITA Twinkie.. As I remember that dinner, Kate asked Jon if he'd cook more often and he said no! Of couse I'm sure he said no because of something Kate did or said. lol He wouldn't want to make the kids happy if it meant Kate would be happy too.

Onlyhuman
Member

08-04-2001

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:36 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Onlyhuman a private message Print Post    
HAHAHA!

Yes, what the world needs is 8 kids with no discipline. In fact, all a child needs is freedom. It's worked so well for Jon. In fact, I see a responsible young man who knows exactly who he is and what is important in his life. NOT!

The best things you can offer your children are structure, discipline and love. Jon can offer the last, but the first two appear to be so lacking in his own life that I can't see him giving it to the children. Love alone is not enough. You end up with spoiled children who think the world revolves around them and then are unable to function in a world in which this does not happen.

Angelicfairies2
Member

07-19-2004

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:42 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Angelicfairies2 a private message Print Post    
Hmmmmm well Kate seems to be VERY spoiled and thinks EVERYTHING revolves around her. Karma! Karma! Is going to get Kate so good, I can't wait, just for the mere fact that she needs to be knocked down a few pegs.

Lilfair
Member

07-09-2003

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:46 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Lilfair a private message Print Post    
I'm still saying they - Jon and Kate - are going to be shocked when they get their legal bills....shocked and broke, again.

Once the TLC money is no longer coming in (do Jon and Kate get residuals for the show) their income will dwindle.

Her book has been delayed, I can't see her doing as many lectures or talks as before the failed marriage. Jon can't make a nickel on his own, even if you gave him a dollar. They'll all be pinching pennies soon, wait and see.

They've got expenses! Body guards, 2 mortgages plus Jon's 5k monthly rent, several car payments (unless they paid cash for the cars) and then some new expenses like feeding and clothing 8 kids. Thankfully they have the solar panels to help keep heating costs down in the big house. Maintaining the property including the pool can quickly become a burden if you've spent all your savings on legal fees.

I'm just saying that they need this divorce to be a quick one so that the lawyer bills don't eat away at their savings. Most likely they'll never make the kind of money they made from the show.
Those days are gone.

If the kids were sad that their "friends" the camera crew left they'll be devastated when high end trips don't come around every few months, toys no longer are thrown at them and all the other products that were thrown their way for ad time on the show (pianos, play houses). I don't think the little ones can really understand the concept of advertisements equalling the luxuries they've received. The twins too will have to adjust all while no longer having mom and dad at home raising them together as a intact family.

They better get their poop together and keep court costs down......they'll need that 200k times two someday. Conservatively, I'm thinking each (if they keep fighting) will have 200k+ in legal costs.

Keldogg
Member

08-12-2005

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:51 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Keldogg a private message Print Post    
I think it's one thing to criticize someone's actions, but I want to believe that no one here actually hopes that something bad happens to EITHER of them.

And the kids need to stay with their parents. If every child who had divorced parents who fought were taken away, there'd be a lot of kids living in orphanages right now.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:53 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
I have never looked at Kate and thought what a great mother. Not even in the old days when I kind of liked her. I looked at a lot of the controlling and snippiness and used them as models of how not to be. I watched her shoo her children away and thought I hope I never do that. There are other TV mothers that I have looked at and saw behavior I admired, tried to model, but Kate really does'nt come to mind as someone to hold up as a model of good mothering! LOL.

I saw part of last night's new episode. She's sending the kids off to school with sack lunches. My first thought is: doesn't the school have a cafeteria? Or is Kate just doing the martyr thing where she can complain about all the lunches she has to make each day rather then just letting the kids eat school lunch. And then I noticed her instructing the kids on how to eat the lunch. "you have to eat this first and then that" and instructing them not to throw anything away so she can inspect their lunch when they get home! LMAO! Can you believe the amount of control she's still trying to exert over those kids. Good luck with that.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:56 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
I agree Lil. Seems these two have already been living high on the hog, spending beyond their means and are now hiring hollywood overpriced lawyers? I'm not sure where they think all this money is supposed to keep coming from. Sad, sad, sad for those kids who only seem to have Kate, Jon, nannies that come and go and camera crews as friends.

Angelicfairies2
Member

07-19-2004

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 4:58 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Angelicfairies2 a private message Print Post    
Star Jones pretty much just said on The Insider that the kids are pretty much "Borderline abused"

Interesting tidbit, The kids apparently have to sneak the phone to call their father. Now that is SAD. Kate needs to suck it up and let those kids call their dad whenever she wants.

If these two keep up like this I wouldn't be surprised if those kids are taken away from them.

Lilfair
Member

07-09-2003

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 5:02 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Lilfair a private message Print Post    
If Kate is keeping any of the kids from calling their dad whenever they want (ok not at 3 a.m. but during waking hours) then I would disagree with Ms. Jones and say it's not borderline abusive it's 100% abusive.

Texannie
Member

07-16-2001

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 5:28 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Texannie a private message Print Post    
it's controlling cause she made them lunch?? then i must be the most controlling mom in the world cause i made my kids' lunches all the way through high school! LOL they hated buying in the cafeteria and it was alot less expensive to make their lunches than to buy.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 5:39 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
It's controlling because she's telling them how to eat their lunch and not to throw anything away so she can inspect and make sure they ate and berate or punish them if they didn't.
I didn't say her making the lunches was controling. I just expect her to complain about, about how she has to make so many, about how she has to do it alone. Boo-hoo. Of course she'll have to inspect the contents alone as well.

Texannie
Member

07-16-2001

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:00 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Texannie a private message Print Post    
wow..again must be controlling mom too cause when my kids started school, i did exactly that. in fact i was encouraged to by their school and their school reinforced it too. i wanted to know what i was wasting my time on making, what they were eating. how horrible of her to encourage her kids to eat the healthy stuff first. must be a terrible precedent to set up! LOL

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:04 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Why would anyone pay for cafeteria food, not exactly known for good nutrition, if you can send a sack lunch that is in line with what you want your kids to eat? It certainly wasn't controlling of my mom.. in fact most days it just meant I could eat and then get outside more quickly than standing in line. We used to buy our milk at school, until they had a remodel of the lunchroom/gymnasium and then most moms got lunch boxes with thermoses.

Well to be fair, most days we walked home and had lunch there, with the menu selected by MOM.

I thought the Gosselin kids went to a small private/church school.. might not even have a cafeteria.

I remember when mom's wrote little notes and put them in the lunch bags.

and why wouldn't a mom want to know if the kids were throwing food away? I'd want to know what they ate, what they didn't, how much, etc.

Like when my mom found out I was stashing the carrots she gave to us and all the neighbor kids when we were watching TV in the late afternoon, but I didn't really like carrots then so i hid them behind the books in the bookcase.. LOL.. after she found the shrivelled up carrots and I
'fessed up, we lost that privilege and had to eat our veggie under supervision at dinner table.

Onlyhuman
Member

08-04-2001

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:11 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Onlyhuman a private message Print Post    
It's controlling because she's telling them how to eat their lunch and not to throw anything away so she can inspect and make sure they ate and berate or punish them if they didn't.

Well, someone call the cops on me, because clearly I abuse the kids that come for summer school every day.

Here are our rules: You must eat your sandwich and fruit before you eat and cookies or candy in your lunch. Potato chips and crackers are after the main (hopefully healthy) sandwich or fruit. You may not throw away food until we see how much you have eaten. You can not get up from the table unless we have seen that you have eaten the main components of your lunch.

There are good reasons for these rules. Kids don't know how to make the best choices and to prioritize their food. Many times they will be so busy chatting with friends that they don't bother to eat at all. Kids can't function in the afternoon if all they have eaten at lunch is half a bag of chips. We are trying to protect the kids from developing bad habits that will follow them for the rest of their lives.

All parents should set rules for eating their lunches and should check to see that they are being followed. If your child is throwing away the sandwich every day and eating only the rice krispie treat, you are headed for problems!

I think the term "abuse" needs to be reserved for actual cases where circumstances are known and clearly warrant the designation. There is a context to behavior that seems to be ignored when we rush to label things as abusive. It's not abusive in and of itself to prevent a child from contacting a parent. There are circumstances, in fact, where it's not appropriate, especially in a divorcing household. If, every time you tell a child "No", he/she runs to call the other parent, that's not appropriate. The child is attempting to "divide and conquer", a technique that children are very adept at employing, especially in situations where conflicts already exist between the parents. Since we only have Star Jones' "expert" testimony that she has heard something from somewhere about the kids not being allowed to call their dad, I would suggest being careful not to jump to conclusions that the situation is "100% abusive".

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:16 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
I always found that asking my child what she ate and what she didn't, what she liked, what she didn't worked pretty well. Never felt the need to police her lunchbox. We already know none of the kids are going to get any special lunch -- they will all be packed the same thing to eat, whether they like it or not.

And yes, my experience at school has been that the lunch ladies do the policing, making sure kids eat lunch.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:23 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
Kate doesn't corner the market on controlling parenting for sure. Some people admire that in her. I do not. Don't think it's ideal or admirable in any way. Different strokes.

Onlyhuman
Member

08-04-2001

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 6:39 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Onlyhuman a private message Print Post    
Lunch ladies in most schools don't have time to police what kids eat or don't eat. They have to herd the kids through the process as quickly and efficiently as possible. They are mostly concerned with behavior and trash. The sheer numbers don't allow for monitoring of an individual child's food.

Setting expectations and limits is NOT controlling. It's what we do for our kids so that they know how to function in society as a whole. Only when Kate is involved is this appropriate behavior seen as pathological.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:12 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Julieboo a private message Print Post    
I always found that asking my child what she ate and what she didn't, what she liked, what she didn't worked pretty well. Never felt the need to police her lunchbox.

Same here. You start a trend like a parole officer and all you do is teach kids to worry about food/eating. Even having a kid who has very limited food preferences, I know what he likes, so I pack what he likes. I don't even feel the need to tell him to eat the sandwich first. I learned early on, just don't pack too much, pack what he'll eat, and most to all will get eaten.

She already has fessed up to being OCDish so this is no surprise.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:22 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
That's how I see it Julie. She's not patrolling their lunch box because she intends to feed them what they like or want to eat. She doesn't do that. She feeds them what she wants and they have to eat it or they are punished (ie. no dessert). Don't think we've ever seen her change her menu to suit their tastes. That's the controlling part.

I can just see her kids giving their sandwich away or stuffing it in their pocket so they can throw it away later and not lose dessert.

Prisonerno6
Member

08-31-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:22 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Prisonerno6 a private message Print Post    
At this point, Kate can't win, Jon can't win, and the kids can only lose.

The only ones that will win are the lawyers.

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:26 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
I think you're right Prisoner! LOL. When Jon's the caretaker maybe the kids well get cafeteria lunches every day and then some can complain that the food they are eating is unhealthy and costly. Or maybe he'll pack them lots of cookies, tell them to eat them first, and then if they are still hungry eat the sandwich.

Cricket
Member

08-05-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:31 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Cricket a private message Print Post    
I thought the Gosselin kids went to a small private/church school.. might not even have a cafeteria

Seamonkey, I read somewhere that the church that used to be on the show doesn't want them coming there anymore. The girls used to go to private school, but now that the Gosselins are wealthy, they seem to be going to a private school.

Doesn't Kate feed them organic food? That could be why she makes their lunch; however, I agree with Brenda as to why it's controlling.

Cricket
Member

08-05-2002

Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 7:35 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Cricket a private message Print Post    
Lunch ladies in most schools don't have time to police what kids eat or don't eat. They have to herd the kids through the process as quickly and efficiently as possible. They are mostly concerned with behavior and trash. The sheer numbers don't allow for monitoring of an individual child's food.

In private schools the teachers do moniter what the children eat and they are not allowed to throw out their trays or home lunches until a certain amount has been eaten.