Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    I actually don't use those terms. you say "theres a whole bunch
    of women out there expounding these buzz word phrases, but not
    one of them can describe/define what they really mean". Well, is
    it more important for this whole bunch of women to define the term,
    or is it more important for them to get what they feel they want?
    if it's the latter, it sounds like you and these women need to talk
    about expectations around your relationship. if this whole bunch
    of women is sitting around expecting something that they never ask
    for, then how can they hope to get it?
    
    good luck (realizing i'm not being much help)
    liz

    Now there's two phrases that make my teeth ache.  "Quality Time",
    indeed.  Is is better "Q.T." for a child/spouse/friend/S.O. in the
    morning over coffee?  At night when you're too tired to "communicate"?
    In the middle of the day for no special reason??
    
    Who makes these nauseating terms up, anyway?  Better to spend "P.O.T."
    (Plain Old Time) with people you care about, don't you think?
    
    ..I didn't mean to soapbox, but these new-wave concepts really
    aggravate me!
    
    Jane
    

    Seems to me that quality time can be measured in terms of the
    non-interchangeability of the participants.
    
    Plain Old Time in front of the tube obviously is not quality time,
    no matter what channel you're watching,
    while discussing something in a way that is particularly relevant
    to the participants obviously is quality time ....  select your
    own exceptions according to your own needs. :-)
    
    	Bruce

    we are going to be ultra honest here...
    
    when my daughter was living with me,we did not have the best of
    relationships.we spent most of our time fighting.i spent less and
    less time at home.i wont get into the reasons the above was happening
    but since she has moved to her fathers the time we spend together
    is less,but it is much more if you see what i mean.we dont fight
    and resent each other now.that is quality time verses quantity of
    time.we enjoy being with each other now.
    
    kelly
    

    re .4
    
    bruce, interesting comment, but i think it depends on the individuals.
    for example, if i watched tv with r, i can imagine times when it
    would be q.t. and other times when it would be a way of not dealing
    with each other. one of the nice activities we do together is to
    sit in the comfy chairs we have in our bedroom and read quietly
    together. there's a lot of communication that goes on even if we're
    quiet during most of that time.
    
    e

    re: .0 
    He e y Bob, hows the guy, eh ?
    
    Quality Time - Meaningful Dialogue - Catch 22
    
    To paraphrase the now famous CHeshire cat from 'Alice in Wonderland':
    "These words means whatever I now intend them to mean, and I reserve
    the right to redfine their meaning whenever I wish."
    
    This said, I originally heard the phrase in connection with working
    mothers .. that is, those women who HAD to choose between a commercial
    career and stayiong at home.
    
    For some, the choice was almost:"If I stay at home and get frustrated
    the child will suffer just as I will, but if I work I can't spend
    as much time as is convenient when the child gets ill; has personal
    needs; and <whatever>".
    
    Psychologists seemd to respond that it is the "Quality Time" that
    really counts. Even though a person can't spend as much time as
    they like; whatever time they do spend should be 'Quality Time'.
    Basically, it assumes that if the parent becomes resentful if
    confronted with Parent-child ALL the time; then for the short available
    time together the interaction can be pleasant, courteous, the
    interactions thoughtful, spontaneity is reserved for PLEASANT
    spontaneity rather than 'frustrated outbursts of anger','misguided
    sarcasm', and other unnecessary unpleasantries.
    
    'Meaningful Dialogue' which is a $.75 phrase for 'talking WITH each
    other' means just that. Talking together about those things in which
    you both have a shared interest, for as long as it takes, interupting
    the conversation only for the most necessary acts. Hmm what you
    and she feels is necessary is up to yous.
    
    Hmm if someone has a 'hidden agenda', or some deep rooted hangups,
    any of this might seem like useless claptap.
    
    Thats where the word 'compatibility' comes in. People who seem to
    always be poles apart with no chance of getting together are probably
    with the wrong person.
    
	In the final analysis, Bob .. if someone is unhappy with you,
    then no matter WHAT you say or do, it's going to be wrong. Its a
    rather sad fact that I've learned the hard way.
    
    Another viewpoint is this: When it gets to the point that you always
    seem to be wrong, the problem is usually elsewhwere. 
    
    Bob
    
    

>    Psychologists seemd to respond that it is the "Quality Time" that
>    really counts. Even though a person can't spend as much time as
>    they like; whatever time they do spend should be 'Quality Time'.
>    Basically, it assumes that if the parent becomes resentful if
>    confronted with Parent-child ALL the time; then for the short available
>    time together the interaction can be pleasant, courteous, the
>    interactions thoughtful, spontaneity is reserved for PLEASANT
>    spontaneity rather than 'frustrated outbursts of anger','misguided
>    sarcasm', and other unnecessary unpleasantries.


While my children and I have moments of pleasant spontaneity (quite a few, in
fact), at times they are also downright pains-in-the-ass, be it from their
being tired, hungry or sick, or from my being tired, hungry or sick.  At those
moments I find it very difficult to convince either them or myself that during
our time together we should all be pleasant and courteous, with thoughtful
interactions and joyous feelings.

I get an uncomfortable feeling whenever I hear the term 'quality time'.  It
invokes in me thoughts of overlaying our personal interactions with a phony
courteousness that prevents us from expressing our true feelings.  I just thank
God that kids aren't so self-disciplined that they can't refrain from expressing
theirs.  Naturally I have to watch myself, but I refuse to place the same 
restraints on my kids.  So if they want to be raging screamers, then I feel
that is their right and that my job is to try to direct that energy into
constructive channels.

    For me, quality time means giving someone good attention.  I don't
    think it necessarily implies courtesy, because one could be angry
    and someone else could be giving them good attention and listening
    to them in a focused way.  
    
    It also means being free enough of distractions to be fully present
    with the other person, adult or child.

    I don't think that all time spent with children can be quality time
    (according to my definition), but some time should be.
    
    If a parent is making dinner, driving in traffic, responding to
    other interruptions, or needing to concentrate on someone else,
    their child may be present, but the time spent would not be quality
    time, I don't think.