Tis the Season . . . for "sacrifice"
The Me Generation has a new take on what it means to make sacrifices “for the children.”
On November 25, the New York Times ran an article about the effect the recent economic downturn (now officially a recession) has had on mothers trying to give their kids the most materialistic Christmases imaginable. The first mother profiled tells the reporter about the designer jeans she’d really like to have, but instead, she’s buying her daughter an Elmo doll and a play kitchen. The photo accompanying the article shows this poor woman in a garage full of boxes of toys. And yet, we are invited to pity her because she will have to forgo her heart’s desire of designer jeans this year.
Says the mother, “I want [my daughter] to be able to look back [and say] my mom was still able to give me stuff.” Yes, you read that right — she doesn’t wish her daughter to grow up to remember the family gatherings where everyone decorated a tree together, or the home-cooked meals, or the holiday traditions like caroling around the neighborhood. Nope, it’s just important for the child to look back one day and know, “my mother was still able to give me stuff.”
One retailer from Toys ‘R Us mentioned that big-ticket toys are still flying off the shelves: “The last thing parents are going to cut from their budget is the Christmas present for their child. We are not seeing price resistance for the hot toys.” Well, thank goodness for that! I thought for a moment that all those poor children might have to give up their dreams of a Wii under the tree.
A retail analyst is quoted in the article as saying that the “typical woman” will, this season, be “finding fashion in the back of her closet.” Wow! Wearing something more than one season — what a sacrifice! While the author of the article does mention that some people may do more than just shop in their own closets (they may also cut back on spending for the kids, or even arrange things like “DVD swaps”) most of the solutions proposed for the problem of buying thousands of dollars of “stuff” at Christmas is to not buy stuff for adults, and just to buy for children. Honestly, doesn’t this just compound the problem of the children thinking they are the center of the universe?
Giving up a luxury or two, like designer jeans, is not sacrifice. It’s not even news. It’s called living within your means, and plenty of people do it every day. But if times really are so tough, then cutting back on the necessities (and a play kitchen is not a necessity) to find ways to impart some deeper meaning to the children will be much more productive. Take them to a senior center to help decorate, or to sing some Christmas carols. Help them serve Christmas dinner at a church or community center that’s feeding the homeless. Make homemade decorations with construction paper, string, and tape. Spend a couple of hours baking grandma’s special holiday cookies. The choices are nearly infinite, and the holiday cheer that comes from helping people who are truly less fortunate will stay in the kids’ hearts a lot longer than one more plastic toy desgined to be played with for a few days, forgotten, and thrown into the trash.
A couple of well-chosen gifts and some time inventing new holiday traditions for your family, plus a few hours spent helping others, will make the season bright for families and those they help. The kids will never miss all the toys they didn’t get when they will have so much more to remember and cherish.
Copyright Martha Kneib. Published 1 December 2008 in Editorials.
Reader comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Great article. I’ve come to “hate” Christmas because it’s all about decorations and expensive gifts and too much food… and not about love or caring about the less fortunate ones anymore.
permalink — 2 December 2008, 00:40
Many of us in the US don’t know how good we have it. This woman should take her kids to Cuidad Juarez, Mexico or the outskirts of the Dominican Republic and see how those children and adults simply exist in poverty. It will be an eye-opening and humbling experience for her and her kids. It is OK to live well, but not OK to be ignorant of true suffering. This woman is not doing her kids any favors.
permalink — 4 December 2008, 11:17
i read this ny times article, and im glad to see i wasnt the only one feeling pity for the woman in the picture , not getting her ‘designer jeans’ and having to be typical and ‘shop in her closet’ this isnt just a child-free issue but it did hit me as one we should speak about. thanks
permalink — 4 December 2008, 13:11
“…most of the solutions proposed for the problem of buying thousands of dollars of “stuff” at Christmas is to not buy stuff for adults, and just to buy for children. Honestly, doesn’t this just compound the problem of the children thinking they are the center of the universe?”
Yes. Yes, it does, and it’s one of the reasons I get so annoyed this time of year – everything is “for the children”. Decorations are “for the children”. Holiday events are “for the children”. The deluge of charity begathons that pop up during the holidays all seem to be “for the children” – needy adults apparently don’t exist between October and February. I can’t even go to see “The Nutcracker” anymore because it’s turned into such a “family” event that the theatre is overrun by yowling, hyperactive kids whose parents haven’t bothered to teach them about the concept of “theatre manners”. I always thought the holidays were supposed to be for everyone…when did they turn into a kids-only gift grab? No wonder today’s kids think the universe revolves around them.
I really have no sympathy for the woman in that NYT article. For the price of that idiotic and sexist play kitchen alone, she could have bought herself a nice pair of jeans, or maybe even a clue.
permalink — 6 December 2008, 10:18
Hmm. Pity these poor women don’t live near any secondhand stores.
Like the one where my mom scored a toy kitchen for my nephew.
And several pairs of jeans for herself.
And a little black dress for me to wear to holiday parties.
All for under $50!
Of course, we have to suffer the indignities of WASHING any toys before giving them to the kid. And knowing that our (in pristine condition) clothes have (GASP!) been worn by others before.
Yeah, too bad we just don’t sacrifice like these poor, noble, mothers.
(‘scuse my while I go gag)
Sorry, I grew up solidly middle class and while I KNOW our family went (and still does, myself included) go all-out on the kids, it’s not like this BS. We got used AND new toys and clothes as gifts. We occasionally got some major thing we wanted, but our gifts were not filled with brand-name clothes and the hottest toys of the season. I didn’t have a game console until I was in grad school.
And all of us turned out just fine and to this day love our family and the traditions the holidays represent.
My sisters and I aren’t getting gifts for each other this year because things are tight and because we did a big family vacation a few months ago. One sis actually asked me if I was OK with the fact that I was buying for their kids but since I don’t have any…well, they weren’t buying for mine. I told her my cats like toys and treats, and she said, great, we’ll figure something out.
And both sisters are getting a little something from me anyway. It’s going to be so fun. :)
Too bad I’ll have to wear all those clothes that still fit me and that I still like for another year, though.
permalink — 11 December 2008, 20:37