Highly recommend you look at Waldorf schools if you want a non-plastic environment for your little ones. Everything is natural, etc. with great focus on creativity. There's the Washington Waldorf School in Bethesda, and Acorn Hill in Silver Spring. My sister loved it for her kids when they were in preschool. (She left once they hit K or 1st grade.)

my 2 and 4 year old play with blocks, books, dress up clothes, legos, barbies puzzles, and the xbox kinect 360. I'm find of an old soul too and we have found there is a lot of "open ended" play at our home. I'm not a stickler on what types of toys we play with as long as they are put away when done playing. I actually think the melissa and doug stuff we have is lame but I won't go into that.

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused.

Why is it ok to chop down trees that take hundreds of years to grow in order to make toys?

Plastic at least can be recycled, so this nonsense about it clogging landfills is a bit much.

Toys are made from new trees, not 100-year-old ones. Pine and beech are most common, and it's easier and less expensive to replace a pine tree than petroleum. The old forests have been logged or are protected, for the most part. And the hardwoods that are still being logged in what might be dubious contexts are typically not going to be used for children's toys.

11:16 raises a good question (I'm 9:33). Do the parents who have no plastic toys have a completely-no-plastic-toys rule or just a no cheaply made licensed product plastic toys with flashy lights rule? Although I guess there are building blocks (Kevas) and stuff that are wood that allow kids to play in ways similar to Lego.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, it does burn me that people mock parents who are making the choices they think are best for my family. You really can't argue that, at least environmentally, the kind of toys at my house have a lower impact. It's okay if you don't think it matters, but you can't really dispute it. My toys are built to last, we pass them on to other families, and when we're done with them, they won't hang around a landfill for the next 3000 years, polluting your kids' planet.

So yeah, if pushed, I'll make a value judgment. But I don't do it unless someone sits there and mocks me for caring. Do you also mock people who pick up trash at the park?

AGREE WITH THIS POSTER. Why would you disparage a parent who is trying to do the right thing by their children and the environment??

but plastic toys can be recycled. In DC, at least, you can put broken plastic toys out with your recycling.

and legos- those that don't buy legos for your kids, is there really evidence that the legos are bad for your kid's health? Because I was thinking of having a legos birthday party and now I'm worried that it will make the kids sick. Legos seem well made to me and unlikely to leach chemicals, but I really would like to hear otherwise if I am wrong. Thanks!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the OP intended to start a fight here. Too bad for people who thought the question was sincere. I answered her honestly on the first page. I really don't care what people have to think about it, I was just answering her question. The lights and sounds DO bother me, and my kid is more creative/active with non-battery operated toys. It's not a philosophy, it's a personal choice. Sorry if that drives some people crazy, lol.

I don't think it was the OP who was trying to start a fight. She's come back on asking gently posed questions a couple of times. I guess it's like anything on DCUM (and in real life?) - sleep training, breastfeeding, etc - where making a choice is perceived as active disparagement of the opposite choice. You can't even ask a question about it without people assuming you're passing judgement. So annoying. Maybe she was just curious?

You know what, you're right. I must have been thinking of another thread. The animosity in thread is obviously even more irritating, since OP asked a question and people are getting criticized by trolls for answering her genuine question. I believe the phenomenon you speak of is due to massive insecurity. I think the last time I saw it get so out of hand was a thread about FTMs finding time to shower with a newborn. I think the best post on that thread was someone claiming they were out moving horses and bales of hay within a month of giving birth or something like that, and that people couldn't manage to cook for house-guests the day they came home from the hospital were "lazy incompetent females". (If that was true, I feel really sorry for that woman, lol).

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the OP intended to start a fight here. Too bad for people who thought the question was sincere. I answered her honestly on the first page. I really don't care what people have to think about it, I was just answering her question. The lights and sounds DO bother me, and my kid is more creative/active with non-battery operated toys. It's not a philosophy, it's a personal choice. Sorry if that drives some people crazy, lol.

I don't think it was the OP who was trying to start a fight. She's come back on asking gently posed questions a couple of times. I guess it's like anything on DCUM (and in real life?) - sleep training, breastfeeding, etc - where making a choice is perceived as active disparagement of the opposite choice. You can't even ask a question about it without people assuming you're passing judgement. So annoying. Maybe she was just curious?

It's clear the OP intended to start a fight here. Too bad for people who thought the question was sincere. I answered her honestly on the first page. I really don't care what people have to think about it, I was just answering her question. The lights and sounds DO bother me, and my kid is more creative/active with non-battery operated toys. It's not a philosophy, it's a personal choice. Sorry if that drives some people crazy, lol.

Not getting the animosity here. So you're not a parent that feels strongly about making particular toy choices. Perhaps you feel strongly about something else in life that others don't feel strongly about? Seeking out particular toys for your kids doesn't mean you have too much time on your hands (don't we all as parents have too little time?). It means that seeking out those toys is something a parent is willing to put some extra time into because they think it's worth it. Surely you have something you're willing to put extra time into that perhaps those parents might similarly not feel is as important? Let's all let ourselves spend our time where we feel it is necessary and stop the judgement. Jeez.

I have a 2yo and a 4yo, so obviously this is going to evolve (just like anything else in parenting), but our general rule right now is not "no plastic or batter-operated ever" but rather we look for toys that have lasting and varied play value. I've never really thought about it concretely before so it's hard to explain, but we prefer toys that don't just do one thing I guess. Like anything that involves "you push this button - toy does that" is a no-go. Mostly because I just don't think it adds any value to the kids' lives (we also have a really small house with no "play room", so we prefer to be more selective about what toys we have rather than just having a big play room that we throw everything into).

Button-pushing stuff also doesn't usually encourage group play, unlike a kitchen set or a dollhouse where the kids are doing dramatic play together. I really don't feel like I'm judgemental about what other people have in their houses, but there is one thing that bothers me, especially with those little computer-like toys. I've seen it happen a number of times - the kids are building something and really working together and then one kid takes out a vtech or whatever those things are, and all group creative play stops and they all crowd around the screen just staring and then inevitably someone feels they aren't getting their turn and they start fighting. I've seen that pattern happen enough that I don't want those toys in my house.

We do try to make good choices in terms of toys with less packaging (we tend to buy second-hand anyway), try to avoid made in China, try to recycle when we can, etc. We're lucky that we can afford the time and money to make these choices of course, but we don't have a hard and fast rule. Looking around my living room - plastic Fisher Price kitchen set, large set of wood blocks, tons of Duplos, basket of plastic play animals, doctor kit, trucks and cars (wood and plastic), marble track (wood), puzzles (wood), books, dolls (cloth mostly), etc.

I think the common theme isn't natural materials or ecologically mindful toys, but rather toys that encourage more than just single interaction "you do this, toy does that." I don't know, it just bothers me to see kids starting at a screen pushing buttons and on the flip side, I take great joy in watching my kids acting out restaurant/waiter scenes together with a notepad and play kitchen or playing vet or building new marble tracks. We don't have a TV either incidentally.

Now obviously this is going to change as they get older and I think every parent who thinks the way I do probably knows that. The goal is age-appropriate, not total restriction. Someone previously brought up movies - obviously you're re-evaluating what types of movies are appropriate as the kids age and allowing them significantly more input as teenagers than they had as 4-year-olds. Same with toys. I'm not anti-technology (I'm actually in IT) and I actually like that the kids have computers in their classrooms at school so they can get tech skills and get used to computers).

And anyways, there are wooden toys, or at least non-button pushing toys that encourage creative play in the 7-10yo range. The marble set we have for example is a hit with even an 11yo that comes to visit (and with my husband, incidentally). Building sets like Legos, dolls remain popular sometimes, I've seen some cool treehouse building sets or other wood working projects that we're psyched to get the kids into when they get older. I'm sure there are more that others can think of, but yes, they probably will be plastic. I'm thinking more of things that get kids up and moving and using their heads instead of staring at a screen.

But again, I only have preschoolers, so this is all in my head for now. But isn't that what parenting is? You do your best, you try to instill your values, and you hope your kids buy into them. If they don't, or if life throws you a curveball, you reevaluate and work with it.

Question for the wood/cloth toy folks. How old are your kids? I'm wondering how long you can go before your kids are begging for plastic toys? And when they do, what happens? Do you give in? What wooden toys are there for the 7-10 age range?

My kids are int he 7-10 age range and I'm trying to think of wooden toys that would appeal to them. We had some wooden toys when they were younger, but we haven't had many wooden toys around the house in a long time (except some kitchen fruit from a while ago).

I'm confused.

Why is it ok to chop down trees that take hundreds of years to grow in order to make toys?

Plastic at least can be recycled, so this nonsense about it clogging landfills is a bit much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If my kids mainly play with hand-me-down plastic toys is that considered acceptable (since it's good for the environment - better than buying new toys made from trees)? Or bad because the toys are ugly and plastic?

Okay, I'll bite. Environmentally, it's probably much better to use your hand me down plastic trees. Aesthetically and creatively, some people might not prefer those toys. And some people would argue that for a person like me, who can buy healthier toys, should forgo the plastic handmedowns and give them to someone else who might otherwise purchase a brand new plastic toy. But honestly, I think it's overthinking to really get into this much detail. My family prefers wooden toys to plastic. We have some plastic toys, both bought for my son and a handful of well-made plastic ones we bought or inherited. But the mainstay of our toy collection, at this point, is cloth or wood.

I'm not the PP, but I don't think this is overthinking anything. If something already exists, it is far better (for the environment, anyway) to utilize it than to create something new.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you. Seriously, I sometimes think I forget why people get so invested in other people's choices and this is a good reminder and explanation. This makes a ton of sense to me. While I don't think everyone on these boards or even this thread is clinically narcissistic, I think points one through three apply to many of us.

When people buy plastic toys made in china, it effects ALL OF US -- made from petrochemicals from the middle east as the poster said above from lead and cadmium tainted chinese plastic that will sit in landfills for decades to come. It's an environmental nightmare and if you care about the planet or your children, you would not be perpetuating this behavior over and over again.

And if you disagree with me, you're worse than Hitler!

It's "affects", though. Not "effects."

Anonymous wrote:If my kids mainly play with hand-me-down plastic toys is that considered acceptable (since it's good for the environment - better than buying new toys made from trees)? Or bad because the toys are ugly and plastic?

Okay, I'll bite. Environmentally, it's probably much better to use your hand me down plastic trees. Aesthetically and creatively, some people might not prefer those toys. And some people would argue that for a person like me, who can buy healthier toys, should forgo the plastic handmedowns and give them to someone else who might otherwise purchase a brand new plastic toy. But honestly, I think it's overthinking to really get into this much detail. My family prefers wooden toys to plastic. We have some plastic toys, both bought for my son and a handful of well-made plastic ones we bought or inherited. But the mainstay of our toy collection, at this point, is cloth or wood.