ABC seeks homesteading families! $20,000

macfie7 · #61 07/22/06, 12:29 PM

I haven't seen "Wife Swap",only some commercials in passing. I'm too busy to sit and watch an entire television program.I wouldn't do it...just me. Not for any amount of money. I did have a thought though. They could just swap me and any one of my 5 sisters. That would be funny. I cannot imagine any one of them doing the easy stuff; the gardening, tilling,cooking from scratch (what's that?),reaching under a hen to get an egg...(teehee), general upkeep;let alone helping herd the cattle, giving injections...milking the goats,or having to put an animal out of it's misery. Ya'll know the drill. Well or sick,rain or shine, doing what has to be done. God doesn't give us a day off .

Just the thought of one of my sisters being here for an entire week with my kids and DH...nope really couldn't do it if it was a stranger!

MaineFarmMom · #62 07/22/06, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tango

When ABC seeks a family of one woman who lives off grid in an unfinished log cabin, who returned to the very basics of milk and eggs - literally, I'd love to be considered

Could use the money to finish my home (especially winter ceiling insulation and my fireplace :baby04: ) But no way am I leaving my bit of Earth, ya'll come here and help me tote water now that my spring has dried up.

That would be great television. I'm sure you'd inspire a lot of women.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cruiser3006

I would like to nominate 'Sancraft'. (although I don't believe many city women would be able to do
what she does/has accomplished) If she has to have a live-in husband, I'll volunteer.
(ps, I know she could use the money)

Another inspiring woman.

Heather - are you reading?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharon in NY

Umm, yeah. Would anyone here really be caught dead on something called "Wife-Swap?"

And what's wrong with being a Luddite? I'm one. Among other things, it spares me knowing about stuff like wife-swap.

Sharon

It didn't work. You've just read about it on modern technology.

Sharon in NY · #63 07/22/06, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quntmphscs

When I'm responding to or participating in a thread, I always imagine that all the people in that thread are sitting around a table talking. Even tough I disagree regularly with people, I try to do it in a kind manner.

It's easy to point out all the bad things about TV when it's just about TV. Yeah most of it's total crap. But a PERSON has posted here and I wonder if she approached you personally and was sitting with you at a table, if you all would be talking to her like this. I think we all tend to forget there is a person behind all these posts. Because we are behind the veil of the internet we feel we can talk to people any way we want to and it just makes me cringe. You guys are being appropriately harsh to a big faceless TV production company. But I'm surprised at the harshness directed towards a post made by an actual person.

But, this has been a sore spot with me for a few months with the board anyway and sorry for hijacking the thread. I just wish people would disagree or express opposing positions in a way that shows that even though they don't care for what the other person is saying, they still care for the other person and therefore will be mindful of their feelings.

I know I would hate it if I posted here asking someone to participate in what I do for a living and people outright called where I work crap. Just my opinion.

I'm sorry that it would offend you to have someone criticize what you do for a living - but we're not having a conversation with this person around a table. This is analagous to being solicited while you are walking down the street, having a telemarketer call you during dinner, or having a Jehova's Witness interrupt your work at home to tell you about eternity. This was a solicitation - and apparently a welcome one to some people (I admit, I'm surprised by how many). It is this person's job to post these things, and our comments are not personal attacks, but comments on the public offering that this person's employer makes. They may be proud of what the employer makes, or they may hate it, but they are here as the public face of a corporation, not as your neighbor or a friend you meet on the street, and criticizing what they have to offer is not a personal attack.

Moreover, I don't think we're obliged to validate everything in the culture just because it might offend someone if we don't. In fact, quite the contrary. To me, the idea of going on a show like "Wife-Swap" is disturbing precisely because homesteading and homesteaders are the antithesis of reality tv. We're really engaged in doing something important, and creating something real, that matters in the world. Whereas the producers of reality tv are engaged in pandering to the lowest, most foolish and worst parts of ourselves. You don't learn anything from reality tv, you don't become a better person by watching it - in fact, I suspect it is rather the latter, because IMHO voyeurism and schaudenfreude are not values.

I recognize that everyone has to have a job, and we can't all pick and choose. Perhaps that's the case for this person. But that doesn't mean we have to validate their work. And there's a lot of good, honorable work in the world. When you choose to do work that does harm - work like this that uses children (who can't fully consent) to amuse people, regardless of the harm it does to them, work that teaches us nothing except to validate the worst parts of ourselves, it is worth noting that not everyone believes such work is worth the cash.

Sharon

**ladycat** · #64 07/22/06, 01:16 PM

I don't know if this will ease anyone's minds, but before they accept families to participate in these shows, they do a thorough criminal background check, a psychological evaluation, and they test for drug use and transmissable diseases. They take a great many precautions to make sure everyone involved is safe.

When animals are involved, they make sure those are going to be properly cared for, too.

Sparticle · #65 07/22/06, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharon in NY

I'm sorry that it would offend you to have someone criticize what you do for a living - but we're not having a conversation with this person around a table. This is analagous to being solicited while you are walking down the street, having a telemarketer call you during dinner, or having a Jehova's Witness interrupt your work at home to tell you about eternity. This was a solicitation - and apparently a welcome one to some people (I admit, I'm surprised by how many). It is this person's job to post these things, and our comments are not personal attacks, but comments on the public offering that this person's employer makes. They may be proud of what the employer makes, or they may hate it, but they are here as the public face of a corporation, not as your neighbor or a friend you meet on the street, and criticizing what they have to offer is not a personal attack.

Moreover, I don't think we're obliged to validate everything in the culture just because it might offend someone if we don't. In fact, quite the contrary. To me, the idea of going on a show like "Wife-Swap" is disturbing precisely because homesteading and homesteaders are the antithesis of reality tv. We're really engaged in doing something important, and creating something real, that matters in the world. Whereas the producers of reality tv are engaged in pandering to the lowest, most foolish and worst parts of ourselves. You don't learn anything from reality tv, you don't become a better person by watching it - in fact, I suspect it is rather the latter, because IMHO voyeurism and schaudenfreude are not values.

I recognize that everyone has to have a job, and we can't all pick and choose. Perhaps that's the case for this person. But that doesn't mean we have to validate their work. And there's a lot of good, honorable work in the world. When you choose to do work that does harm - work like this that uses children (who can't fully consent) to amuse people, regardless of the harm it does to them, work that teaches us nothing except to validate the worst parts of ourselves, it is worth noting that not everyone believes such work is worth the cash.

Sharon

No, people don't have to agree with what I do for a living. But there are decent ways of speaking to people. A no thank you or actually discussing what you don't like about what she does is one thing, calling her company crap is another (post was deleted). If a JW came to my door I might say no thanks and please make a note not to come back, Or I might have a discussion with them about our differences of opinion (which usually runs them off too). But I wouldn't tell them what they do is crap or any other really harsh observations. What's the point. All people do when you are rude, harsh or mean is shut down and don't listen. So then what's the point, just to hear yourself talk? If you want to express a differing view point with another person in hopes that they will truly hear you and understand, then you have to do it in a way that doesn't close the conversation down.

I'm not validating the show or what she does. This really has nothing to do with the show at this point. It's about being able to disagree with someone or make it clear to them that this request doesn't fall in line with your beliefs without getting ugly. But, like I said, this was just my opinion and it has been on my mind for some time.

I think the posts that explain the problems people have with this show are educational for me and maybe for this woman. For example, your last paragraph says a lot without being ugly.

But I have bigger problems today and have said what I had on my mind. I don't expect everyone to agree with me and that's OK.

gilberte · #66 07/23/06, 07:31 AM

Well it was me that referred to what that poor little lady's company produces and puts out over the airways as something less than worth watching and I stand by my opinion (worth about two cents and is the only reason for keeping the penny in circulation).

I'd say the same thing to her face as quickly as I would here. Seems some folks have rather thin skin, took offense to my post and it was deleted, oh well, I guess I'll still be able to get through the day

Now on with the discussion, is there anyone here willing to sell their story to ABC for $20,000 (probably a little less after taxes)? Of course there is, some people will do anything for a dollar.

If this post doesn't meet the Warm and fuzzy standard just go ahead and hit that delete button Chuck.

jnap31 · #67 07/23/06, 09:47 AM

I have never seen her program or any "reality" programming I have not done the TV thing for a long time now, I find reading to be more profitable. So I cant share an opinion though Like gilberte said there are some who will do anything for a dollar. Cant belive your post was deleted for sharing a different view.

nduetime · #68 07/23/06, 09:52 AM

I would do it in a heartbeat but our kids are grown and married and our grandkids are all in school now. I would also insist on having a trusted friend to back up the animal responsibilities. I would not want just anyone to be taking care of the animals without someone I knew who would be in charge of them. Oh well, I do not think ABC is ready for baby boomers yet! I would love to see either Melissa or Sancraft do it though. As long as everything was taken care of I think it would be a hoot to teach some city folk where food really comes from.

Qwispea · #69 07/23/06, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnap31

I have never seen her program or any "reality" programming I have not done the TV thing for a long time now, I find reading to be more profitable. So I cant share an opinion though Like gilberte said there are some who will do anything for a dollar. Cant belive your post was deleted for sharing a different view.

Jnap,

I'm just wondering if you read gilberte's post jnap ..since you "can't believe it was deleted".

I did not read gilberte's post (and don't want to). I trust that the Admin knows how to effectively run his forum.

mpillow · #70 07/23/06, 12:42 PM

gilberte's post was something about "Always Broadcast Crap" on your fields in Spring

Sharon in NY · #71 07/23/06, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaineFarmMom

It didn't work. You've just read about it on modern technology.

Hey Robin - we've had this conversation before, I think, back on the old HT, no? That's not what Luddism is - Luddism is a rejection of the notion that technological progress for progress's own sake must rule the day. The old Luddites weren't wholesale rejectors of technology (although popular history makes them out to be), but people who rejected the use of technology to strip them of their livelihood. They argued that their right to eat and live outweighed the right of businesses to impoverish them. The Luddites used technology too - they used looms and carts and spinning wheels to do their work. But they knew they'd starve if their livelihood was taken away (and they were right - the ones who weren't executed did starve to death, mostly), and they resisted - and were killed for destroying machinery, creating a legal precedent that helped lead to corporate personhood today. IMHO, Ned Ludd (who was fictional, but based on an actual guy) and his allies were heroes, and I'm a proud luddite.

Sharon

MaineFarmMom · #72 07/23/06, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharon in NY

Hey Robin - we've had this conversation before, I think, back on the old HT, no?

We might have. If so, I've forgotten. =(

Quote:

That's not what Luddism is - Luddism is a rejection of the notion that technological progress for progress's own sake must rule the day.

Ahhhhh Got it now. Thanks.

Quote:

The old Luddites weren't wholesale rejectors of technology (although popular history makes them out to be),

Yes it does, and that's where I got the false impression.

Quote:

but people who rejected the use of technology to strip them of their livelihood. They argued that their right to eat and live outweighed the right of businesses to impoverish them. The Luddites used technology too - they used looms and carts and spinning wheels to do their work. But they knew they'd starve if their livelihood was taken away (and they were right - the ones who weren't executed did starve to death, mostly), and they resisted - and were killed for destroying machinery, creating a legal precedent that helped lead to corporate personhood today. IMHO, Ned Ludd (who was fictional, but based on an actual guy) and his allies were heroes, and I'm a proud luddite.

Sharon

When the current book is on the shelves you could (hint hint) start thinking of a history book written from angle of homesteading and self sufficiency.

HilltopDaisy · #73 07/23/06, 05:36 PM

If I remember correctly, one show was about a farmer and his wife, and a wealthy couple. I only saw one episode and it made me sick. The wealthy woman was supposed to help the farmer with the milking, etc., and she did not; in fact, all she did was b**ch about how the home smelled like manure. The husband and kids about killed themselves getting everything done, and the man actually cried because he was so upset. I wouldn't do that to people I loved for a million dollars. Just so America can sit on their fat arses and point, and laugh, because they have nothing better to do. If I had my way there would be no television.

nduetime · #74 07/23/06, 05:42 PM

You have a good point there Hilltop Daisy, I remember that one and the DH did cry. Your right, I guess i would not do it either. My Dh would not cry, he would haul bottom half of anatomy and bring me back home to finish chores with him! And I would love him for it!

sullen · #75 07/23/06, 06:00 PM

OK I would do it but they would have to bring someone in to care for the animals. Family doesn't even know what to do to feed them or where the feed is. Plus we don't have an extra bedroom. That would be a problem for most "homesteaders" I think, I can't see anyone having a spare room.
DH would loose it, I think. Would be funny. Might be worth it..........If he could see himself on TV, OH then you guys would get where I am coming from.

MarleneS · #76 07/24/06, 09:32 AM

If my impression of Melissa and her family is correct we would not have to be concerned about Homesteading or Homesteaders being made to look foolish. If anything, I would be more concerned about too many people wanting to become homesteaders after viewing Cale and family on the homestead no matter what sort of "wife" they exchanged Melissa for. The other side of the coin would be no matter what style of family Melissa got to share the week with they would be the better for it

Go for it Melissa - think of all those memories

Hugs
Marlene

chickflick · #77 07/24/06, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayne02

. Do you really think mainstream America (read: instant gratification, short attention span, materialistic etc) is interested in seeing a typical "homestead"? I hate to break this to you, but our homesteading lifestyle is boring with a capital B to most folks.

Wayne

I dunno, Wayne. You might be surprised. Some old friends of mine have a beautiful 350 acre place w/ approximately 35 families (REAL Christians) down near Waco, Texas. Twice a year it is open to the public, and they come in DROVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Heather...Heathermaybe THAT would be a great show all in it's own right? Here's the website:
http://www.homesteadheritage.com/
Rather than these self absorbed, negative "homesteading" martyrs on THIS forum... The homesteaders at the Texas place are for REAL. They do EVERYTHING from scratch!! Furniture, homes, draft horses to plow, etc. And they're really mellow, and pleasant about it all.

chickflick · #78 07/24/06, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quntmphscs

When I'm responding to or participating in a thread, I always imagine that all the people in that thread are sitting around a table talking. Even tough I disagree regularly with people, I try to do it in a kind manner.

It's easy to point out all the bad things about TV when it's just about TV. Yeah most of it's total crap. But a PERSON has posted here and I wonder if she approached you personally and was sitting with you at a table, if you all would be talking to her like this. I think we all tend to forget there is a person behind all these posts. Because we are behind the veil of the internet we feel we can talk to people any way we want to and it just makes me cringe. You guys are being appropriately harsh to a big faceless TV production company. But I'm surprised at the harshness directed towards a post made by an actual person.

But, this has been a sore spot with me for a few months with the board anyway and sorry for hijacking the thread. I just wish people would disagree or express opposing positions in a way that shows that even though they don't care for what the other person is saying, they still care for the other person and therefore will be mindful of their feelings.

I know I would hate it if I posted here asking someone to participate in what I do for a living and people outright called where I work crap. Just my opinion.

AMEN!!!!!!!! Ditto, Ditto, Ditto!

homebirtha · #79 07/24/06, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNKY PIONEER

What I want to know is why they are offering $20, 000 to the homesteaders when they normally pay $50,000?? It seem they think we are not worth the $ others are paid.

Huh? Actually, they used to only pay $5,000 NOT $50,000. I know of two families that were on the show the first season, and they only got $5k. So they've raised the pay apparently.

gilberte · #80 07/24/06, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarleneS

Homesteaders look foolish. I would be more concerned about Cale and family on the homestead no matter what sort of "wife" they exchanged Melissa for they would be the better for it

Marlene

Just having a little fun with editing (like they do on these shows

) You cannot deny that you posted these words can you?