Britney Spears, Lindsey Lohan, The Olsen Twins, Jodie Sweetin, Todd Bridges, Dana Plato...the list goes on and on. Why do some parents still chase after fame for their children? Is it living vicariously through their kids or something else altogether?
2007-07-27 04:34:38 · 6 answers · asked by Julia Sugarbaker 7 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
Jodie Sweetin recently overcame an addiction to Crystal Meth. She was on a talk show talking about it.
2007-07-27 04:40:03 · update #1
i TOTALLY agree with you here. i think it's something to do with the parents fufilling their own childhood dreams through their kids. i was reading a sickening magazine article about a 10yo who gets spray tans, models and cheerleads for a living. the mother said that her [daughter's] teachers don't approve of how she looks, but the mother said [totally true here] "these people are just jealous of
2007-07-27 04:43:21 · answer #1 · answered by lexie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OMG, girl, ITA with you. I think some parents ARE living their dreams through their children. I have several theories as to why they do this.
1) They had their goals in tact, ready to fulfill their passion, but they fell in love, got married and had children too early to actually realize them
2) They realized they did not have the talent to make it in show business
3) They were persuaded to give up their dreams and go on to college to study something more legitimate, because of the argument that it's impossible to earn a lliving in show business. This theory cheeses me off the most!
They didn't really want to give up on their dreams despite all this (though common sense dictates they really should put them in the grave.) Therefore they feel they must live vicariously through their children by putting immense pressure to do a good job for agents, making so many sacrifices in childhood, and chastising and reprimanding them for even the littlest mistakes. Disgusting. I see this in many sports parents, too.
This is why I choose to be a literacy parent. Literacy parents, the way I see it, although they do tend to live vicariously through their children, are more in control of the situation. Sure, we would encourage them to read widely and well, but good literacy parents would actually let their children read what they want. Whenever they submit a poem or story, these parents would gently point out what they would change, include, rearrange, etc. (without sugarcoating all the time... LOL) and they would really be encouraging them to do well in English. The only thing literacy parents would be guilty of is encouraging their children to do poorly in certain subjects, like Math, or perhaps Science or History.
2007-07-27 12:15:02 · answer #2 · answered by Sharon Newman (YR) Must Die 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think a big part of it is living vicariously, but I think another thing is the cash. I know a lot of a child star's earnings must go into an account just for them, but look at what happened to Gary Coleman. He made loads of cash, but his parents and manager somehow got it.
2007-07-27 12:24:05 · answer #3 · answered by Purdey EP 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sure some kids end up bad but there are so many that have not
-Kirk and Candice Cameron
-Miley Cyrus
- Jodie Foster
-Lisa Whelchel
-Melissa Gilbert
I really think the number of the ones that go bad is not as big as the ones that don't, it's just that being good is not that interesting.
2007-07-27 11:47:06 · answer #4 · answered by Kitikat 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only reason they are screwed up is because their parents didn't have control over them. They let their children do what they want. Not ALL kids are going to be like them.
Oh, yeah, I remember Jodie talking about it.
2007-07-27 11:38:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
By definition, Hollow-wood has nothing to do with reality, - yet folks out there are out-of-touch with reality themselves, - and think that hollow-wood is actually a goal to shoot for.
Too bad for the kids.
2007-07-27 11:43:14 · answer #6 · answered by MK6 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋