Be honest: did you think about future dating opportunities for your child when you decided to send

[Anonymous]

No, but the opposite entered my mind via an article in the Atlantic or someplace about the earlier and less committed sexual practices in at least some public schools vs private. I recall it being a study and a demonstrable difference. So it was avoiding the wrong dating pool, and not searching for the right one (what’s that even). but it’s a bonus. These are nice kids who’ve come up together including at cotillions etc. I’m sure it’s the same in public (it was in our old school) but I wasn’t going to wait and find out after the principal of the prospective public kept extolling grit and resilience as the greatest virtues. Maybe hold the grit for now, at least for my DCs
- unapologetic in DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s the truth nobody wants to acknowledge.

maybe your truth, not ours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, but the opposite entered my mind via an article in the Atlantic or someplace about the earlier and less committed sexual practices in at least some public schools vs private. I recall it being a study and a demonstrable difference. So it was avoiding the wrong dating pool, and not searching for the right one (what’s that even). but it’s a bonus. These are nice kids who’ve come up together including at cotillions etc. I’m sure it’s the same in public (it was in our old school) but I wasn’t going to wait and find out after the principal of the prospective public kept extolling grit and resilience as the greatest virtues. Maybe hold the grit for now, at least for my DCs
- unapologetic in DC

You don’t have to apologize but thanks for opening the way for my gritty, resilient DCs who are also actually really smart. If you combine kind, smart and tough (gritty) you can go literally anywhere. Removing gritty makes a big difference.

[Anonymous]

That could be the pithiest answer to the OPs’ question: is it about the desired dating pool or about “removing gritty” from it? I’ll get the popcorn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That could be the pithiest answer to the OPs’ question: is it about the desired dating pool or about “removing gritty” from it? I’ll get the popcorn.

kinda the same thing but I think most people think of the latter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but the opposite entered my mind via an article in the Atlantic or someplace about the earlier and less committed sexual practices in at least some public schools vs private. I recall it being a study and a demonstrable difference. So it was avoiding the wrong dating pool, and not searching for the right one (what’s that even). but it’s a bonus. These are nice kids who’ve come up together including at cotillions etc. I’m sure it’s the same in public (it was in our old school) but I wasn’t going to wait and find out after the principal of the prospective public kept extolling grit and resilience as the greatest virtues. Maybe hold the grit for now, at least for my DCs
- unapologetic in DC

You don’t have to apologize but thanks for opening the way for my gritty, resilient DCs who are also actually really smart. If you combine kind, smart and tough (gritty) you can go literally anywhere. Removing gritty makes a big difference.

You can develop grit as a kid without being shanked in the stairwell. A parent’s illness, your own internal struggles. An unpleasant divorce. Financial change of circumstances. Being hospitalized a few times. The list is kind of open and isn’t limited to a violent high school like the one down the street from us that we drove past to get a better HS in DC

[Anonymous]

No, not at all. I did consider co-ed vs. single sex, not for dating opportunities but for having more exposure to, and hopefully, greater understanding of, the other gender.

[Anonymous]

You are crazy not to be focused on dating - marrying a partner from the right background is a reliable predictor of future affluence and happiness.

[Anonymous]

Don’t let your kids date until college at an Ivy League school.

[Anonymous]

Dating is part of peer group interaction. I wasn’t particularly interested in dating prospects, however I was concerned with the peer groups DS would be interacted.

It is something to think about I guess. I agree that the kids are too young to be dating though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes yes of course we shell out big bucks hoping our child will meet their soul mate over cheeze its and granola bars.

You do realize a lot of people apply for HS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dating is part of peer group interaction. I wasn’t particularly interested in dating prospects, however I was concerned with the peer groups DS would be interacted.

It is something to think about I guess. I agree that the kids are too young to be dating though.

You don’t think high school kids should be dating? Are you from a different culture?

[Anonymous]

Zero percent

[Anonymous]

No, but for college, the male/female ratio is a consideration. I have a straight son, and I do want him to have a chance to date in college so I would not recommend a school that skews boy significantly.

[Anonymous]

Okay, this is all eye-rolly or worse, I agree.

But I went to a pretty fancy college. It IS easier if you marry to someone well connected and wealthy and well educated it just is. Now *I* didn't really on #1 and #2, but I scored on #3 (and a bit on 2, given where we went to college).

So I guess I get it, although HS seems really early.