September 8th, 2009
I noticed this weekend that Josh’s people and I differ significantly in our understanding of the age-appropriateness of certain outdoor activities. Particularly those that involve the slaying of woodland and/or aquatic creatures.
To Josh and the men of his family, “huntingandfishing” is one activity (usually pronounced together) and they can’t wait to introduce Miss Mouse to its mystical arts.
To me, those are two very distinct past times with two very different age thresholds. Fishing is a gentle and fairly innocuous sport involving lots of sitting around, idle chatter, and the occasional arcing arm movement. Although I did get a fishing hook embedded in my ankle at summer camp when I was about ten, for the most part I concede that it’s a pretty harmless activity and I’ll be happy to send Miss Mouse and her dad out, tackle boxes in hand, just as soon as she can walk.
Hunting is a whole different ball game for the simple reason that it involves deadly weapons. I’m not a sentimentalist and have no problem serving Bambi for dinner. But I do believe that sixteen is a perfectly reasonable age restriction for any activity that could involve the accidental demise of its participants.
Am I crazy?