Re: FW: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Indigo Children

From: Elizabeth Marrin <>
Date: Mon Jun 9 23:58:00 2003

Yeah, some moderation needs to be heard in this conversation.

People call me "Elizabeth" but I am not judged as "AN
Elizabeth." That would just be silly. It so happens that I
could be a great ruler, and I am single... but hey, I'm not
saying there's a correlation there. :)

If you start proscribing other ideas to the name, then you start
moving in the direction of being ignorant. In the same way, a
name is just a name. How people use it is another story. If
the problem is labeling and then getting stuck on the label,
then stop calling it the label. I'd imagine another term for
indigo is gifted or having 'entelechy' from another website

Who knows... when I hear a label, I know that everyone has their
own perspective when they say something. There hardly any real
universal truths when we're all coming from different angles.

"An" Elizabeth

--- R FAYE BYREM <> wrote:
> Hi Carol,
> I agree with yours and Karen's assessment of those appalling
> comments.
> I detest labels also. But I wonder if it's actually possible
> to live without them in the context of society as a whole. I
> mean, how do we identify with a nameless pattern in a certain
> segment of society? What should we call say, Autism? Or
> should we just not call it anything at all. Or any mental
> illness. Or any number of things where we have identified
> certain patterns in a segment of society that has far-reaching
> implications for so many human beings?
> On a personal level, far too many are 'branded' with a label
> that can follow them throughout their lives, which is a
> terrible injustice, whether it is the stigma of 'gifted' or
> 'trouble-maker' or whatever it may be. Labels bring with them
> unfair and unrealistic expectations.
> Labels encourage 'comparisons' of souls, which brings
> 'judgment' upon souls....if one is special, that means another
> one isn't....which shouldn't be.
> As I've read more about Indigo Children, I'm finding what to
> me seems some rather bizarre ideas. It doesn't necessarily
> mean they ARE bizarre, but they are to my way of thinking.
> Nevertheless, the little research I've done has enlightened me
> a great deal about many things. Not the least of which is
> that my child is not so unusual in the grand scheme of things.
> To me, that was a very valuable discovery.
> When I first stumbled across the term "Indigo Children", and
> began reading, I began seeing some very familiar personality
> traits repeated over and over again. I was naturally very
> interested and excited to find that there are so many other
> children with the same traits.
> I wasn't trying to find a 'box' to fit my child into, but
> rather, I was seeking answers to some very perplexing problems
> that I've encountered, and haven't been able to find a
> comfortable place to lay these concerns to rest.
> I think what researching this has done for me is to give focus
> to what I already knew about my child. It gave me a
> comfortable place to 'rest', and 'breathe' and gave me the
> freedom to 'release' some things that needed to be released.
> Now, we can continue on in a new phase of our journey
> together.
> Nothing has changed. And yet, in some ways, everything has
> changed. He and I are the same. But we are now on a much
> freer path.
> Maybe we would have found this same freedom in some other way.
> But we didn't. We found it by the label 'Indigo Children'
> jumping off a page at me, and causing me to wonder, to seek,
> and to find.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Carol Hughes
> To:
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 3:12 PM
> Subject: Re: FW: [Discuss-sudbury-model] Indigo Children
> "Indigo children are highly evolved being they are 'old
> souls', they possess
> wisdom way beyond their years, they 'know' things which they
> have not yet
> touched upon, they are imaginative, creative, very psychic,
> overly sensitive
> and highly inteligent."
> Hi Karen,
> What is it about us humans that we need to label things?
> And why is there
> such a strong need to polarize people around ideas? If I
> have a differing
> opinion does that necessitate the argument that any opposing
> opinion is
> stupid? I have found that children who are free to grow in
> a healthy way
> possess wisdom way beyond their years, 'know' things which
> they have not yet
> touched upon, are imaginative, creative, very psychic, very
> aware (overly
> sensitive) and highly intelligent." This person who wrote
> the article/book
> has discovered... nothing new! "we have no tolerance
> threshold for people
> who lie, lack integrity and/or are stupid" well, yah!
> Interesting that she
> has decided not to have children herself. My standards are
> pretty simple.
> If an idea doesn't seem helpful or exciting or newly
> empowering in some way,
> then heck I have lots of that material already. Don't need
> any more.
> Carol
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list
Received on Mon Jun 09 2003 - 23:57:41 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:05 EDT