Hey, there! Log in / Register
Tom Brady, troublemaker
By adamg on Thu, 08/23/2007 - 11:22am
Meredith O'Brien harrumphs:
Thanks to Tom Brady: I got to have an awkward, torturous conversation, highlighted by pretzel-like contortions at the dinner table last night when my kids asked me how Patriots quarterback Tom Brady (whose jersey they have, a poster of whom decorates my 6-year-old son Casey's wall) can become a father without being married to the mommy. ...
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Not to be rude, but why are
Not to be rude, but why are 6 year old children aware of Tom Brady's personal life? How odd. Maybe it's time to turn the TV off and open a book.
Wow, that's ridiculous.
Wow, that's ridiculous. Also, how does you child not have one friend who has a single parent? Do you get freaked that you have to explain that, too? Christ.
I see her point though, it's
I see her point though, it's not exactly easy to explain that there's a baby but the two adults are not married.
Trying to keep a child from hearing about the latest nasty celebrity news is near-impossible. You can shut off the TV, and open all of the books you want, but there are still newspapers, radio, word of mouth, and other sources. Not hard to understand, SM.
I also fail to see why you're so freaked, BR. Perhaps this person has a set of values she would like to pass to her children and she see it becomingly increasingly harder to do so. This bothers her. Why does it bother you?
tom bradys kid
come on.if your kid is confused about this just tell him that tom brady is special and he can bang whomever he pleases.also, if he is a boy, tell him to be careful of older women whose biological clocks are ticking.it seems to me that tommy boy was looking for the door ans sweet, OLDER, girlfriend Bridgette was forgetting to take her birth control.none the less im sure tom will be a good dad.he seems to be a good guy.if you really want to blow your kids mind tell him to look up dave meggett.now that guy did some stuff id be embarrased to talk to my shrink about.
You clearly have an ego that warrents something along the lines of... lets just say a "Pro Football player" or perhaps even a well known comedian who also had started in movies. All of you men that go around and displace the blame of getting pregnany upon the womans shoulders should be ashamed of yourselves. As if it is entirely the womans responisibilty to protect herself. Either you are not lucky enough to have a woman to bang at night, or you do and your ego dictates who protects whom. You clearly have bigger issue's to deal with if you brain doesn't allow you to look at both sides with compassion and simply understanding. It is clearn in Tom Brady's case that he was with Bridgette for 3 years and she seemed to not get pregnant all that time, but wham one time she does. Do you not know how this happens you self obsorbed ego maniac. The man deposits his sperm inside the woman and even with the birth control pill, condoms, DP injections and even vasecomies, there are always chances that one determined quarterback like sperm can make it's way to it's goal (for you empty headed men- that would be the "egg". But when that does happen and you have already moved onto the next playing field and do not take this situation ceriously you all run like big babies and want to hide out in your childhood tree fort and wine about who should be accountable for thier actions. Well, when you do that, remember that there will be a child left hurt and a woman left to pick up the pieces. You are a complete and total ego filled self obsorbed prick. I can't believe you even wrote what you wrote. Kids and tv or sports go hand and had. Are you also suggesting we do not allow our kids to watch sports programs and then suddenly run into the TV room to mute the sports casters commentaires between plays. I can't begin to guess how old you are, but I gather you know of MJ's habits long before the paparatzi went around following these people 24-7. Kids go to school and talk, Kids that ask questions at home clearly feel compelled to look to a "RESPONSIBLE ADULT" for guidance and if done well. The responsible parent can use TOM BRADY as a lesson who not to be like when you grow up. Sports star or not, he is a complete and total loser, and the next woman he is with is too stupid to see the writing on the wall. But maybe one day when she has a childherself, she may find some light in her own empty head and try to encourage Tom to do the right thing and be a roll model not to just all the sports fanatics in the world but to... His own son...
Way to go all you TOM BRADY'S out there.. Way to go...
get over yourself
I'm sure the offended mother's children will be scarred for life! Lighten up.
You Want A Sure Thing? Here It Is!
Anyone who says "Get over yourself" has never taken his/her own advice.
Values versus sheltering
Sure, it's fine to raise your kids with the values that you'd prefer they be in a stable and committed relationship before procreating. Don't most of us wish this for our kids?
But as the other commenter pointed out, I don't think it's really appropriate to instill this value by teaching your kid that other families are bad or wrong. Or pretending they don't exist. Kids are concrete, as they're supposed to be. If you teach your kid that babies come from married parents, they grow up viewing their classmates families as not really families, and their classmates as having come from somewhere where normal people don't come from. It's easy to give someone less than full respect when you don't view them as fully human because they don't have the kind of family people are "supposed" to have.
I'm only somewhat married (I have to file my federal taxes as a single person and don't have most of the 1049 rights that come with federal marriage), and I really hope for my future children's sake that they don't encounter children who've been taught that babies only come from married parents. What would this make them, in this case? Not really children? Who don't really have parents? And what about my dear friend who has adopted several children as a single-by-choice father? Regardless of whether someone thinks single fatherhood meshes with their personal values, who are they to teach their child that this man's children don't "really" have a family or don't really belong there? There are many choices I would not personally make, but we do everyone a disservice when we teach our children that people who've made choices we don't agree with are lesser people than they are.
Eeka, I'm not sure if you were addressing me in particular, but I'll work under that assumption I was at least included in your intended audience :-)
My problem isn't with the concept of teaching children that different values may be just as acceptable and good as those we hold dear ourselves. A cursory run-through of my blog will tell anyone that I have some views that run counter to the norm. So, people who live in glass houses, and all that.
My problem is with snarks who think that everything can be distilled down to a one-line drive-by insult. Also, with those who think that all values are equal - until someone espouses values they disagree with.
(You, Eeka, are obviously neither one of the above. You actually give thought to your writing. And if your prose was directed at someone else, my apologies for butting in.)
And the drive-by insulting seems to be happening in both directions here. The mom who wrote the original post thinks it's OK to insult Tom Brady's choices because they're inconvenient for her to explain to her children. It's her choice to raise her children so that NFL stars are their role models, but then she can deal with the consequences of them being exposed to all sorts of values that may be different from hers. She's responsible for teaching her children values. She can choose to do this by limiting their exposure to certain things, or not limiting it but making her own views clear. If she prefers not to have to explain why her kids' role models do things her family disagrees with, she might consider limiting media exposure so that their choices of role models tend to be people who are known for philanthrophic and similar pursuits. Still not fail-proof, but teaching values tends to be easier when your kids are admiring people FOR their values rather than admiring people for being rich or pretty or brawny while knowing nothing about their values.
Then on the other end, there are people throwing one-line insults at the original blogger for letting her kids hear about Tom Brady's personal life. They're throwing a blanket judgment on her family and values and practices. I don't care one way or the other what she lets her kids watch; I just think it isn't Tom Brady's responsibility to act in such a way that it's convenient for her to explain to her kids, and I think she'd have an easier time explaining diverse families to her kids if she'd thought about this earlier. Again, age-appropriateness! All a six-year-old needs to know is that kids come from all different sorts of families. They don't need to be speculating about why someone had a kid or whether they should have had a kid. Hell, adults don't need to be doing this about other people's families!
Well put, and thank you for it.
not all families are equal
Its perfectly fine to teach your kids that not all families are equal; they are not. You yourself say that you'd prefer people be in a stable and committed relationship before procreating. Study after study has shown that this is when kids do best. Now, if a child is born into other circumstances, and often they often are, that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the child. It's not the child's fault and they should not be held to account for the sins of the father. It also doesn't mean they are lesser, or they don't belong, but there is nothing wrong with teaching your kids that children should only be born to a married mommy and daddy who love each other very much.
But think about this in the context of child development
If you teach a child who's in the concrete stage of development that children only "should" be born into a certain type of family, you are teaching the child that the children who are not born into this type of family are lesser.
Also, there's a difference between expressing your values and expressing universal values. This is the type of distinction kids can understand.
"At our house, it's fine to get up from the table before everyone finishes, but when we go to your uncle's, we need to stay at the table until everyone is finished."
"In our family, we think it's important that children have a married mother and father. But children do come from all types of families, and all families are beautiful and valuable."
It's fine for you, JP Guy, to believe that you want to have children in the context of a married heterosexual relationship, and to teach your children that this is your personal value. But please, for the sake of my future children, who will be raised with two mommies, don't teach your children that all children "should" be raised with het parents. This is teaching them that my children do not have a "right" family.
(to quote Petula Clark's famous mid-1960's song) It's the sign of the times.
Please note: This is a reply to SM's message.
It is unfortunate that she
It is unfortunate that she cannot give her child her own value lessons on her own time schedule. However, she should also know that her family's life is not insulated, that life does indeed happen outside her circle. It's never the "right" time to talk about these adult subjects with your kids, but it's much better than keeping them in the dark. They'll learn about it one way or another, at least you can have the conversation honestly and your kids will respect you much more for it.
It will be uncomfortable, but a six-year-old should be able to understand the concept of there being more than one type of family. It's a great time for a talk about how sports stars are just ordinary people, too, who have partners, and kids, and are not necessarily "one big happy family".
out of context
From some of the snark here, it sounds very much like some of you didn't bother to read the the full post, but stuck with the out of context blurb above.
Read the article. Ms. O'Brien's issue isn't with married vs. unmarried parents and where her values are regarding that. She was trying to avoid a birds & bees discussion with a SIX year old child. Seems like a reasonable concern to me. Most 6 year olds really don't seem ready to absorb a clinical discussion of sexual intercourse.
I did read her post
It didn't sound to me like she's purposely attacking anyone's family, but it does sound like she's put off by her child hearing that someone has a child and doesn't live with that child, because it doesn't mesh with the narrow picture of "family" that she's given her kids. Does she express the same sentiments regarding neighbors and classmates who don't live with both parents? From her writings, she doesn't seem the type to go around insulting families in her community, but it's really not any better to insult families in the public eye, either. She makes it sound like his choice of family constellation has inconvenienced her. He has no obligation to live his life in such a way that it is easily explained to children. Neither do the families in her community. An age-appropriate explanation that there are all sorts of family constellations and we're all people seems like it would suffice. If she hadn't previously told the child (erroneously) that children come only from married parents, they wouldn't be asking such a question. Again, she doesn't seem like the type to purposely insult other families, but it does sound like she didn't really consider other types of families from hers when she taught her children what a family is.
Two Trees skit by Sesame
Two Trees skit by Sesame Street
If she'd just raise her kids on Sesame Street and not the local news or Extra!, they'd be able to tell her how two people can be mommy and daddy but live in two different places.
I didn't know of that skit; thanks! Sesame Street is awesome. And they've always been great with explaining things in an age-appropriate manner.
GROW UP AND STOP EMBARRASSING PEOPLE, OK?
Just tell the kid the truth. You don't have to be married to have children...simple....what's the contortions crap...If you are religious challenged and don't like the idea of passing on that truth to your child, say this:
"You don't have to be married to have children, but in our church we believe you should be."
Tempest in a teapot here, I suspect meant to embarras tom.....grow up so you kid can!
Tell the kids that Brady's a babydaddy. Like K-Fed.
[From Urban Dictionary: "Short for "Baby's Daddy". The father of your child, whom you did not marry, and with whom you are not currently involved."]
That sums it up pretty well. Not that the news would dare to use that term.
Son, Tom Brady is a dirtbag
Son, the reason that Tom Brady has a child with his ex-girlfriend and is now shacking up with Giselle Bundchen is that he's a dirtbag. He knocked up his girlfriend, then ran off on her to chase a prettier woman. Gisele Bundchen may be one of the most beautiful skinny blond things in the world - hey, she's even got her own line of flip-flops - but if you grow up to run off on your children to chase a skinny blond thing, I'll disown you.
Married people have children. Sometimes unmarried people have children. Sometimes it's an accident, sometimes on purpose. And it's all right if people have children when they're unmarried. But it's not all right when people run off on their children. We call those people dirtbags. Say it with daddy: "Tom Brady is a dirtbag."
Do you know anything?
Really. Anything about the world and things that occur in it. Or do you just imagine things and make your opinions accordingly. Aside from it being anyone's right to be in whatever relationship they want to be in and with no indication that Brady is intending to shirk responsibility for his child, by all accounts Moynahan didn't discover that she was pregnant until her relationship with Brady was over. So, your characterization is disingenuous. Their relationship ended on its own and they later learned that Moynahan was pregnant. He didn't "knock her up and run" as you imply.
And the more important lesson here is that it's not anyone's business to speculate and gossip about other people's families. Sure, he's in the public eye, so people are hearing about it, but beyond that, we can leave their family alone and just wish them well as fellow human beings. "Their family is different from ours. Children grow up in many types of families. Let's hope the baby is healthy and well cared for. Would you like some peas?"
I know a few things.
Many more things, surely, I don't know.
I know this: Tom Brady is a serial modelizer and a playboy. Now he's the baby-daddy of a rich little bastard - a chip off the old block, to be sure. And I know this: he's a lousy role-model for a child.
Sure, everybody's got rights. Rights to do whatevah da fuck we want, BOYYYY! We've got rights to be moral, rights to be immoral, rights to be responsible, rights to be irresponsible. Tom Brady, Michael Vick, Pacman Jones, Gordon Cherilus, they've all got rights to be complete scoundrels if they want to -- and they seem to enjoy exercising them.
Even poor little nobody me, I've got rights too. For example, I've got the right to tell my son that professional athletes are lousy role models. And there are reasons for that. They didn't get where they are (splashed all over the TV, billboards, living in penthouses with buckets full of money) by being smart. They didn't get there by being productive. Nor moral. Nor kind. They got there by throwing or kicking some ball around. Playing with a ball is a great play-time activity for a child. When adults grow up and do that as their job, they're essentially professional children. So it should be no surprise that they act like overgrown children off the field, crashing fancy cars, getting drunk, knocking up models, beating up women, and running off on their own children.
Tom Brady can live his life any way he wants - like you say, he's got a right to. But don't ask me to respect him. Because he's got no right to my respect. I save that for real men.
HEYYYYYY TOM BRADYYYYY
Take care of your baby, Tom Brady. And that doesn't mean signing the check. "Life Choices" my arse, I second the DIRTBAG moniker.
Get a life, woman. Quit raising your kid in a hermetically sealed box already.
By the time my son was 5, he already knew that families came in different configurations. It didn't bother him in the least - some kids he knew had one mommy because they were adopted or otherwise created, some others had only a daddy for various reasons (including death), some had two mommies or two daddies and some had grandparents and others had mommies and daddies.
He once thought the twins across the street had a common wife (until the one moved out and married somebody else). So what?
I would have no problem explaining how being married and having children are very different things, and I think my kids are vastly better off for it. They will enter adulthood ready for the real world that isn't so tidy and neat and sheltered.
Sex has nothing to do with marriage in the animal kingdom. It has nothing to do with marriage in the human world. It has a whole lot to do with having babies. Just point to puppies and kittens and that's all there needs to be said.
Simple...Tell you kids Tom is irresponsible and creates bastard children....Hope that was easy.....
Meredith O'Brien's reality distortion bubble
I’m just wondering what kinda 6 year olds aren’t already familiar with kids with only one parent? Or two mommy/two daddy families? Seriously.
No divorces, no lesbian or gay couples, no widow(er)s, no unmarried couples, no absent parents; what statistically improbable bubble of family, friends, & neighbors is Meredith O’Brien claiming to live in?
Dollars to donuts O’Brien’s kids are already aware of lots of ‘non-traditional’ families amongst their relatives & playmates. It’s willfully blind Mommy Meredith that is gonna eventually have to have the facts of life explained to her, by her kids.
Or, Meredith O’Brien’s just lying through her teeth for a story, and teaching her kids about a whole ‘nother set of values & lifestyles...
With today's world being so
With today's world being so f%cked up by all the single-parents and gay people who think they are parents...it's a wonder how anyone real family (that's a mother and a father for you stupid people) can raise a normal kid. If today's society continues on the path it's heading it's destined for extinction.
Ooh, more anonymous homophobia! Oooh I'm scared!
Care to post again and insult my family nonanonymously? Would you really make such comments while posting in a way that your neighbors, family, and employer would be able to identify that the comments came from you? I'm guessing not, because you know it's wrong.
I might be ruining society or whatever, but at least I post in connection with websites that have my real name and occupation and neighborhood there for all to see. Having a family that makes the world more diverse is nothing to be ashamed of. But making attacks on people who are different from you clearly is, or else you'd do it loud and proud.
Come on Now!
I was just going to read all these posts and click the x in the corner and make everyone go away...but....the comment about how single parents are f&%king up the world is very insulting to me. I am a single parent of 2 young sons, and they are way better off now than when I was married. My ex was a typical man...egotistical...scummy...alcoholic...drug addict...cheater! I would have to say that it's more THE MEN in this world that are screwing things up for our children. If I didn't leave my husband when I did my kids would be privy to drug abuse, cheating,verbal abuse, etc....on a daily basis. When you make comments about single moms you better do your homework first and not make such a generalized insult. As for Tom...I heard he hasn't seen his son since he was born! Yeah, great role model I want for my kids! He can afford to hop on a plane and see his son for a few hours and be back home that night...Gimme a break Tom, buck up, be a man, take care of your kid! Not just signing a check!
It's wrong to make a generalized insult about single moms but it's OK to label an egotistical, scummy, alcoholic drug addict as a typical man?
Likely to be
a sampling error.
it isn't a sampling error so much as it is an inadequate sample size issue. Statistical power to detect differences is nil by definition with a sample size of n=1 because there is no variation in the population to work with.
I think it is better considered a sampling error (more specifically, a systematic error). It appears likely that the commenter's sample (assuming n>1) was not randomly chosen from among the greater population of males. Although the sample appears to have been uniformly close to mean, the standard deviation appears too high.
Get the drift?