Short Rant

Just a brief rant tonight, as I'm currently too brain-dead and chirpy to be severely pissed off at anything that isn't My Kitchen Rules. But that's perhaps a story for another time.

Here in Melbourne, all the kiddies start school for another year this week. Thank god. Means I (hopefully) won't be stuck with a hyperactive child on a trampoline outside my window every day. However, on the other hand, kiddies back at school means they'll be clogging up trains and buses with their cliques, excessive swearing and inane screaming-if they're high schoolers, that is. Primary school kiddies just go on excursions where you're walking to a train and find yourself enveloped by what seems to be an entire year level. Anyway.

On the news every year, there's a particular emphasis on multiple-birth children having their first day at school. Usually, it's twins, but I imagine it's a red letter day when they, as channel 7 seems to have done this year, find quadruplets toddling off to prep. The more children there are, the more interested us viewers are apparently meant to be. This has been puzzling and irritating me for many years. A child's first day at school is one of those important milestones, no matter the circumstances. It's supposed to be some big emotional day for parents everywhere. So what if a kid starting school happens to have a clone? It, in my opinion, that is, shouldn't make the occasion more important than a child with no siblings. I'm thinking the human-interest reporters should try another angle, and focus on disadvantaged children or someone else whose story truly stands out and tugs at the heartstrings, rather than going "Look! This small child has a double, and possibly a triple! Let's ponder how the other kiddies will be confused by them, and think about just how much more proud their parents will be!" (Apologies to any twins or relatives of twins who happen to read this, I just don't think that being a twin or triplet or quadruplet or whatever is THAT special.)

That rant made me remember a slightly different story on the news tonight. I only saw the news update in the commercial breaks, but my mother filled me in on the story itself later. It seems that some woman hired a limo to take her kid/s to school for the first time. My only thought was "What. The. FUCK?" Not only is this ridiculously excessive, but it, to me, suggests a certain disinterest in the child or children in question. I was under the impression that driving one's child to their first day of school was part of the emotional significance for the parent, where the parent can share in the day and be with their child and all that. To hire a limo suggests to me that the parent, although probably well-meaning, possibly can't be bothered establishing or maintaining a bond with their offspring. The child becomes some sort of trophy, another way for the well-off parent to show off their status in life and all the things they can provide. This is obviously just my opinion, as I know nothing of these people and their lives and relationships; it's speculation on my part. However, that doesn't mean things like this never happen. Parenting is becoming ever more extravagant, which makes me wonder what happened to just raising a child and loving them. The best things in life are apparently free, after all.

Well, so much for a brief rant! Guess anything child-related angers me more than I thought. I could probably opine on issues such as this until the cows come home, but I think the more productive option would be to shut up and catch up on some much-needed sleep. Goodnight world!