Photobucket Saturday, February 28, 2009
.... What?!

1) Babysitter needed two nights this weekend in strip hotel (Las Vegas)
we will be coming to vegas this weekend friday 2/27 to sunday 3/1 i have two boys ages 3,5 and 6 that go to sleep at 7/8pm and sleep well i need babysitter for both nights for few hours at the time approximately 7pm till 12am or so (i can be little flexible) i need somebody with good experience, and references you will need to provide your own transportation contact me asap with contact info and your rate thank you ula
Original URL: :
Special Thanks to: northjerseynanny, anythingelselikepay, ISYNreaderbutnotposter(yet), Amy, Carrie, walkrt4 and Mint Cool.... all of you did a great job! Remember: CL-WTF will be Posted every Saturday... please send next weeks Ads HERE.



?huh said...

What's wrong with the CL ad? many hotel workers will babysit on the side for extra income. If properly checked out it may not be a bad idea. Maybe the CL ad poster has a way of checking references. Nothing wrong with looking for a babysitter while on vacation.

Misread said...

Regarding #5 - I don't think the babysitter is for the senior. I think it is for the other 2 kids. But the mom is saying oh and I have this other son who leaves early in the am so he can't watch them. If I was going to be babysitting at a home that might have a guy in the house while I am there I would want to know up front. He might still be getting ready or something when the sitter gets there.

Lisahhh said...

What's wrong with #1? Lots of families get babysitters to sit with their kids while staying at hotels. In fact, many hotels offer that service through the concierge. The hours seem reasonable too. Out at 7, back by midnight. No WTF here.

bella said...

C'mon people! It's STILL a STRANGER watching your kid! How can you do a thorough background check on these people in less than 24 hours?

** said...

So is #27 on here because it is creepy? I will admit I was a little extra creeped when I read that it was a guy.

That said, when I had to live in an apt that had a no dog policy I offered to walk neighbors dogs for free just because I wanted a running/walking companion. Some people might have thought I was crazy but I love dogs.

I guess there are people who love children so much that they wouldn't mind watching them for free/cheap.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lisahhh said...

(Sorry, MPP... I hit the wrong button before posting)

**I had the same reaction as you. I got creeped out when I saw it was a guy. I'm almost ashamed to admit that.

I get what you're saying, Bella. Yes, it's a stranger. Yet, I've been at many hotels - particularly high-end ones - that offer this service. I've never used it myself and probably wouldn't place a CL ad to find one, but would consider using a babysitter recommended by the hotel itself. Of course, I'd have to be sure that they'd properly vetted the sitter.

I didn't see anything wrong with #9 or #11 either. Paying someone to watch the kids at a wedding? That's ok. Particularly since the parents will presumably be right there to keep an eye on things.

Lisahhh said...

Strike that... #11 was definitely WTF. I should have had my coffee before posting. I look forward to Saturday morning CL WTF. :-)

#27 said...

27 changed the price. It went from 300 to 400, and he said he's not doing it for the money.

Yeah, we know, you're actually doing it to make kiddy porn.

just another mommy said...

I thought the funniest one was the lady trying to tell you what a great sitter she'd be and yet she couldn't spell half the words she used.

Philly Nanny said...


the WTF here is that the parent should find childcare through the hotel. most places(especially casinos, who want the parents to stay up and spend money) offer babysitting resources. Hiring someone off craigslist without meeting them first (they want the sitter to work the first night they're in town) is a terrible idea.

Black Orchid said...

I think what make #27 so creepy is that it sounds like he only takes care of girls (excluding his nephew). He picks up school age girls, and the little one he used to take care of almost 24/7 was also a girl.

a reader gone nuts said...

I don't blame #2 or #7 for their unusual titles. The name of the game now is standing out.

I can't comprehend people like #6 who use the children are sleeping excuse. I have to wonder I they'd be willing to be paid less between when they finish their paperwork at the office and when they find more? Or whatever their job function is, why not, they're not doing anything? Sure they're still stuck on the clock, unable to go anywhere, do anything...

#9 needs to learn to use family members for a job like that. You're telling me there are no older children in either family to deputize? How can anyone expect to a perfect stranger, emphasis on "a", as in they should hire more, and "stranger", as in they won't already have familiarity with the children, to manage eight to ten children under seven, instantly.

I'm so glad #10 mentioned their "in-home water purification system", I won't go anywhere without one! *roll eyes*

#11, part time with food yes, full time without no. How does this person expect their nanny to survive? What of food, health insurance, car insurance, etc. Why do families think nannies are without expenses?

Great #12, another I pay crap because the children are sleeping nut. Worse, CAPS! Made my eyes want to explode.

$2.09/hr on #14. You won't fine anyone sane for that amount. May I suggest looking up local felons, or better, scan through the sex offender registry? What you seek is called "level 3". (Please God, no one take me seriously.)

#15, take your 35 to 45 hours at $2.89 to $3.71 an hour and see the suggestion above. If one can't live on a full time wage... you'd think this would be common sense. #16, cocktails?

Oh wow, #17 takes the cake here. 55 hours for $75 is $1.36 an hour! I'm so glad she listed Baghdad as a joke, cause strike the joke part it may be one of the only places she'll find a willing caregiver aside from my suggestion to #14.

Wait, a new contender, let's see how #20 does, 100/40 is $2.50 an hour! Oh, tough break, so close but no cigar. #23, you're being way too "generous" with your $2.77 to $3.07 an hour!

These are so sad.

a reader sane again said...

Black Orchid,

#27 did sound odd, I'll give you that. On the other hand, Paul isn't always a male name and what if this is a female, what difference does that really make?

I'd still be weirded out by the presentation.

a reader gone nuts said...

Correction: find not fine

"You won't fine anyone sane for that amount"

"You won't find anyone sane for that amount"


NannyJ said...

The whole time I was reading #27 I was thinking it sounded like a creepy guy. Then I read Paul and I was like "oh shoot I'm right! :("

...I have never heard of a woman named Paul...

a reader sane again said...


Really? You've never heard of Paula, Paulette, Paulina or Pauline? Or nick names like when someone named Samantha is called Sam?

How odd. Of course I used to know a Paulina, so it's normalized for me.

Village said...

Is it just me, or do the pay offers seem to be getting less and less each week. You can live in a room for free if you take care of a child 40 hours a week. So at $10 a hour, the room costs $1600 a month? Am I missing something?

Maybe the economy is tanking, and people will end up in other's homes taking care of their children for next to nothing. YIKES

And to that dual Dell couple, good luck. I wouldn't want both paychecks coming from the same source in this economy. And their poor nanny if they get one, with BOTH parents home.

And the wedding sitter. Four hours with seven children at least for 60 bucks. Oh, and don't eat a damned thing. Good luck with that.

a reader sane again said...


We're in a recession, not a depression. We're doing worse than we were before, but we still have the strongest economy in the world.

Yeah, it's tough out there, but there is no excuse for what these folks are doing. People who don't have family near where they are should move, people who have neighbors in similar situations should exchange childcare, people should explore educational opportunities where they may get enough money to cover their expenses and have their children cared for while they're in class (some community colleges offer this), a great number need to drop the narcissism and consider a nanny share where a disgusting $7 an hour becomes a roughly competitive $14 and finally, those who are just taking advantage need to stop doing so.

Excellent point on #9! I missed the meal mention entirely.

a reader sane again said...


"Or nick names like when someone named Samantha is called Sam?"

I didn't mean to be condescending here. My apologies if interpreted as such.

MissDeeLovesHerTreo said...

I realize we are in a recession now, and I hate to say that I won't watch anyone's children for under $10 per hour. J's mom pays me half of what nannies in this area (Madison, WI) start at, and I am fine with what she pays me because I adore her and love J. The WTF here is why these people think it's OK to hire a complete stranger to watch their children, and to pay the people who watch their children shit, because they can. I do think "you get what you pay for", and my preschool charges high prices for tuition but we are the best school in the city and surrounding areas. Mary, when you mentioned taking the WTF column in a new direction, here are some ideas:

Whackiest Ad Of The Week

Dirt Cheap

Can You Imagine Working For These People? (Think of the yam with limbs porn star mommy who has a watermelon cart for a chest who posted here a few weeks ago)

Seriously: $1.36 and $2.50 per hour? A waitress makes more than that!

Nanny Taxi said...

I am speechless. I am without speech.

Village said...

A Sane Reader- Sharing a nanny is a really good idea.

I have a question. I have a friend who shares a 'nanny' with a friend one day a week for two hours. She insists she has a nanny, but isn't that more of a babysitter? I have to keep from laughing every time she says the nanny is coming over, for two hours.

honest nanny said...

#27 is just creepy! if he really loves kids and just wants to take care of them - that whole thing could have been worded better. YIKES!

are people really accepting jobs for these rates?! i mean, i know times are tough. i know people can't afford childcare (i was let go from my last job for this reason), but $2/hour? $4/hour? i loved the one that was upfront by saying $4/hour. haha...

but the more i think of it - we've been reading these low priced jobs for weeks now and it only seems to get lower. wow. the economy sucks!

its no longer a WTF for me when i see a low ad, i'm just used to them. now its more like, How Sad - either the economy has sucked these people dry or they are complete idiots. no matter how you look at it its Sad.

not a nanny, not an employer, but c'mon said...

I always post the same comment...but just for the record...WHY do people without the means to pay even minimum wage think they should be looking for a *nanny* as opposed to *daycare*? Is daycare THAT BAD??

Several in-home daycares near me don't charge much more than $2/hour per kid and they are perfectly nice places. What you don't get is one-on-one care, of course, or care in your own home. But IMO those could actually be pluses, depending on how you look at it.

Nanny model of care = one-on-one, higher level of compensation expected, because ONE child or one family's children are being cared for

Daycare model of care = 1:4 or 1:6 ratio of caregivers to kids, thus lower level of compensation as there are LOTS of kids paying to make up the caregiver's salary.

Nannies are for the well-off! Daycare is not a bad option! So WHY are these poor souls who are totally broke looking for the nanny model of care? It is totally insulting to nannies IMO. And pity the poor kids who are "cared for" by whoever their parents find willing to work for $2/hour. So sad.

idea said...

Someone needs to send all of the people who advertised on CL who are featured here a letter with a link to this!

Paul's a Perv! said...

THIS is the perviest part of "Paul"'s presentation:

If it could possibly work, tell me about her; What she likes to eat, play with, what she weighs and what size clothes she wears, if she likes books, how much she's talking, nap /sleep schedule, potty trained or any interest in it and anything else you feel is pertinent about her.
I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Paul

WTF? What size clothes she wears and how much she weighs? So you can get the right costumes for her scenes in that kiddie porn? How much she's talking? So you can know how much of a "risk" she'll be to tattle on you? Skeevy!!

Paul's a Perv! said...

Oh, and P.S. on #27:

"I also have an indoor washer /Dryer so you will never take home dirty clothes."

Oh, how helpful of you, Paul! You can wash out any of those incriminating "stains" on the little girls' clothes before you send them home. Disgusting.

About post above said...

Regarding the post above: I think that comments should never be disabled on a public blog. Especially when the person who submits the story seems to only care that a nanny was fat and had rolls. Maybe the nanny was neglectful, but honestly, that was seriously overshadowed by the discriminations that the nanny was large. The OP requesting no comments was obviously aware of the tone of his or her post and that's why they didn't want comments. Totally retarded.

a reader playing devil's advocate said...

Paul's a Perv!,

I remain unconvinced, but I'll submit I've been known to be a bit naive.

a. While I'll concede that it is more likely than not that Paul is male, we don't technically know. It's something to remember.

b. Yeah, he/she/it asks a lot of questions, and some of them are eyebrow raising. I wouldn't blame a parent for saying no thanks, it's a very poor presentation that does seem very perverted.

I concede all of that. I would in fact encourage the person who received the email to forward it to their state's CPS, just in case.

On the other hand, playing devil's advocate, I don't see having a washer/dryer and wanting to know her weight and clothing sizes as damning as you think it is.

1. Were this person really the type we think he may be, would it really matter if the clothes could be washed. I doubt they'd be on. :(

The sentiment they may wanted to have communicated was a willingness to do more than just watch?

2. How much she ways plays to which type of car seat she needs. At x weight he/she/it may have a booster or seat, at y weight he/she/it may have not have the booster or seat.

So these two I think are relatively fine.

3. This is very weird, what the heck - it is a red flag, but *only* because it is in the initial email.

Any good childcare provider should know the clothing sizes of their charges. If only for knowing what backup clothes to pack for outings. However, it isn't something you need to ever ask!

My heaven's, you learn it as you go along. The average 3 year old is either 3T or 4T, unless unusually small.

Again, don't get me wrong, I have a very bad feeling about this person, am worried about what may result and would NOT hire them.

But I still must wonder, what if this email ended with "Paulina", would the assumption be the same?

a reader playing devil's advocate said...

Correction: weighs not ways

Err, how on Earth did I type the other?

Anonymous said...

Well since th "fat roll" nanny post commentary is disabled above:

I just gagged at the blowing her nose with her finger comment. Actually just threw up a little in my mouth.

Even though the "large" community might be/will be offended by the post, I have to say: how do you hire a morbidly obese nanny who very likely has trouble being active. How is that a healthy rolemodel? And I don't want to hear the "I am born that way excuse" because only a small percentage of the population has health problems like that! Weight aside- she is dirty and gross in hygiene behavior-snot blowing. Can't you find some nice college kid?

Seth said...

What is offensive and ignorant is any person who would use the word retarded as you did above. Shame on you, ignoramus. Perhaps OP just wanted to avoid deviants like you?

a reader said...


I agree. When someone uses "rolls of fat" to describe someone's appearance, it's more the fault of the one being observed than the observer. Eww.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a bit over myself and could stand to lose. But I can still jog, tire small children before they tire me and no one would ever describe me as having rolls of fat.

I also don't like this new comments disabled policy.

a reader said...


With respect, I don't see your comments as anything better.

a reader said...

* I'd also note, I'm not the "a post above" person.

seth said...

Personally, I think that the economy could be salvaged if we just imparted a fabric tax. Do you realize that a pair of size 2 seven jeans cost as much as a size 20 seven jeans? We need to start taxing people based on the fabric required to cover their massive bodies. Yep, that's how we turn around the market and the economy.

a reader said...


Heck no! Didn't you read the post above, the clothing was already ill fitting on this person.

Fat people in shorts are bad enough, let's not encourage it! Ewwww...

a reader who should shut up said...

This beyond the practical reality that when people are having their heat shut off, or having to turn their thermostat down, and you're a leader in a government that is for the people, of the people and by the people that attempting a tax on more clothing would be political suicide.

Good. Bye. Career.

NNJ said...

what the heck if we can't comment now on threads that are posted on here. Whats the use of coming here anymore?

I am talking about the post above this one. The nanny blowing snot out her nose

I could be wrong said...

My favorite one was the "gifted daughter" one. It may be strong evidence that giftedness is not inherited.
Unless I missed somewhere that the job is part-time, they are proposing to pay $3.75/hr on the books. Um, if you're going to pay on the books, don't you have to at least pay minimum wage?

ac said...

Number 25 must be on something. I'm guessing at 150 a week she wants someone to work full time?? Even at 250 a week that is not legal. How in the world does she think she will get away with paying below min. wage?? She is asking the person to pay taxes.. I'm trying to figure out how that nanny would live off of a little over 400 a MONTH..I do not think that would pay for rent ANYWHERE.

Precisely said...


"I'm trying to figure out how that nanny would live off of a little over 400 a MONTH."

You hit the nail on the head.

No one can.

And yet people ask.

hmm mmmm said...

"Babysitter needed two nights this weekend in strip hotel"

That just doesn't read right.

This Isn't Charity said...

I'm going to need someone to use small words and pictures to explain to me how people who are so struggling to make ends meet expect me to do the same with what little they can spare?

hmm mmmm said...

Am I the only one who noticed this in #21: "Please send the pics of your house."

So not only do they not want you in their home, but they're going to go out of their way to prejudge your home.

Question, who is it that would accept $4 an hour is going to have a nice enough home?


hmm mmmm said...

* Who is it that would both accept $4 an hour and have a nice enough home?

worlds best nanny said...

Egads! can you imagine having to keep a "gifted" child entertained for 3 dollars and change an hour? I tried to email the person but the ad was flagged and removed by Craigslist. I can't imagine why!

If you cannot afford to pay for a real nanny, do not advertise for one! It's that simple!

Oh, and the hotel one..I did it once at a Residence Inn. Apartment-like room, kitchen, eating area, 2 bedrooms and a bathroom. 4 kids, 3 boys 1 girl. The family sold their home but the home they were having built wasn't quite ready. The parents needed to attend a wake, so I babysat for 3 or 4 hours. Made $50, no biggie.

honest nanny said...

The couple I work for went on vacation to Mexico a couple of weeks ago. I did not go with them and as our little guy goes to sleep at 6pm they had to hire someone to watch him in the evenings.

They found someone through the hotel and had an ok experience with it. I mean, the lady wasn't me, but the baby wasn't harmed or anything.

finding a nanny on CL - No
finding a nanny through hotel - probably safer.

JustAMommy said...

What's wrong with number one is these people don't seem to know how many children they have.

(Two boys, ages 3,5, and 6?)

JustAMommy said...

"$2.09/hr on #14. You won't fine anyone sane for that amount. May I suggest looking up local felons, or better, scan through the sex offender registry? What you seek is called "level 3". (Please God, no one take me seriously.)"

Less, actually, because if you notice she stipulates that the provider is to supply "all meals." Meaning she has to feed the kids on her $2.09/hour salary... dang.

I Submitted #25 said...

World's Best Nanny- I noticed on Friday that the same person posted another ad with a "Stop flagging my post!" memo. I was going to post it here, but it was flagged and removed already.

I was astonished when I read her requirements and just the whole tone of her post. It was kind of condescending and gave the vibe that you were never going to be appreciated, no matter what you did.

I have been a nanny in New Haven for three years and for my first job I was making $17/ hour for one little boy and then when they moved, I accepted a job with a friend of theirs who paid $14/ hour, again, for one little boy, the little boy that I still nanny for. We spend a lot of time at local playgrounds and playgroups and we all (the nannies) make at least $11/ hour. I mean this price is laugable anywhere, but for this woman to be expecting to pay someone $3/ hour TAXED in an area where, for what she wants, she should be expecting to pay more like $15-$18/ hour is simply unreal.

I read it and I really said WTF!

group home worker said...

I am amazed no one commented on #22 yet. $200 a month she is paying for 47.5 hours a week. It doesn't matter if it is a school aged child. 4:30pm-2am, the kid is awake some of those hours. That's 190 hours a month for $200, it's just above $1 an hour.

honest nanny said...

group home worker,
i think that there are so many posts with low prices that no one knows which one to discuss! haha.

these posts are absolutely absurd, pathetically ridiculous.

etereia said...

For #25, why is a credit check required? I really don't understand the point of that one.

Nanny Taxi said...


I had a credit check done on me for a job, they only did it once I was hired. I guess they were afraid that someone had a low credit score that they was going to walk off with their precious knickknacks.

From "Reeling In The Years" by Steely Dan

"Your everlasting summer
You can see it fading fast
So you grab a piece of something
That you think is gonna last
You wouldnt know a diamond
If you held it in your hand

honest nanny said...

my employers did a credit check on me, but it was only because the background check included it. if you are handling their money in any way i guess it would be good to know... for example i am responsible to create a monthly budget for my charge and I's activities.

a reader going nuts again said...

group home worker,

Dang it, I missed that one. $1.05 beats $1.36 and takes the trophy!

honest nanny,

"finding a nanny on CL - No"

I would hope you mean in comparison to the hotel option on a one time thing and not in general?

On long term deals, no matter the source, you're going to need to run the same checks and have the same risks. CL then is harmless if you do things right.

I Submitted #25,

$15 to $18 is about normal for my area as well. I like to say $12 to $20 with $14 to $18 being most common.

But that's nothing compared to the fact that no one could ever hope of living off the $1.05/hr, $1.36/hr, $3.07/hr, $3.71/hr above and yet these people expect full time, or even greater!

How on Earth does anyone even think that'd ever be possible?

Another agenda has to be in place for anyone to take that. The person must have terrible skeletons in their closet, devious intent, severely disabled (SSI payments) or be a very bored trust fund baby and I don't think there are many of the fourth! I've never heard of any.

You want your nanny to be working to live, in part for the safety of your children.

a reader on credit checks said...

I'm a nanny now, but years ago I used to be a bookkeeper for a software company.

They had no other bookkeepers and no accountant on staff. I was it.

I managed millions in assets, doing payroll, accounts receivable and accounts payable. On top of this I answered the phone, ran errands and set about random projects to improve the general efficiency of things around the office.

This company wanted me to stay, they offered to send me to school to become an accountant and I opted to not. Why? Well, because I'm human. This company was in California and I was born in Washington.

I missed my family, I missed playing with my cousins and I missed the many children I would often babysit for. So I came home and went to school for other things. Soon after my return I became a nanny and now I've been a nanny/student for four years.

I never had that company or any family I work for run a credit check on me. Now, when I was much younger I did two holiday stints in retail and those stores did it.

Strange, huh?

honest nanny said...

reader going nuts: yes i did mean for a one time job, not in general. i'm a firm supporter of CL for many things, but when you don't have the time to complete the necessary background & reference checks on someone i find CL to be an unwise choice.

then again i've had friends hired for one times jobs like weddings, etc. and they are safe. its just not something i recommend doing - its a scary world out there!

give yourself the time needed to check people out! thankfully many hotels have done that for you, which is why i recommend that service in these instances.

a reader said...

honest nanny,

"when you don't have the time to complete the necessary background & reference checks on someone i find CL to be an unwise choice" "give yourself the time needed to check people out! "

I agree.

"then again i've had friends hired for one times jobs like weddings"

Well, like you said, it's a time thing. Very few don't plan ahead on their weddings, so there's plenty of time to run the right checks. :)

Nanny from Fargo said...

I agree with almost all of the comments so far.

ABOUT the one with the really creepy and over-interested tone, #27 I believe...

While at one point "Paul" says something to suggest he is willing to care for a "he or she".. it is definitely implied in the rest of the email and posting that Paul wants to care for a SHE.

And, I do wonder why Paul wants to know how much talking the child does.... It just seems very creepy. I would hope that the child can do a LOT of talking and reporting back to parents!

While I am a firm believer in giving the benefit of the doubt, I also think that with certain things, it is always better to be safe than sorry. Your children are just no exception.

I would hate to see a 71 year old person's good name dragged through the mud when they could in fact be doing nothing wrong.

That being said... when I was in high school, we had a janitor who was very touchy feely, awkward and inappropriate. My parents and others encouraged us to just be nice, because he was probably just "old fashioned" and acted like the "weird uncle." However, years later I found out he finally got fired for taking it too far.

What I'm trying to say is... people play the innocent card, but that doesn't mean that we should play along.

I'm going to try to contact "Paul" and pretend to be interested, to see what sort of information I can get.

Nanny from Fargo said...


I just realized there is no link for Paul! Now what?

Mary said...

If you google the title of that ad:

"Looking to care for a baby or toddler in my home for $5 an hour"

You'll get one match, the URL was:

When you click on it, you get a message saying that the ad has been removed by the author.

HOWEVER -- the same "Paul" still has an ad up at, you can view it here:

And contact him if you're still interesting in doing a little sleuthing.

Too nice said...

Is it a little unethical to pretend you might need a sitter when you really don't? What if this person passes up another offer because of your contact? I understand why you want to do it, just be careful not to lead them on too much. It is a crappy economy and all.

Nanny from Fargo said...

Unethical? No- I don't think so anyways. What would be unethical would be to do nothing when my gut is telling me that something is not right, and that children could be hurt.

I understand what you are saying, and no I will not lead him to think he is hired :) I would hope that no one would accept a job offer from someone who has sent them no interest besides one or two emails!!

Sandie said...

The wedding one made me laugh. The bride can't swing a dinner for the poor sitter? She'll sit at the table with the kids and watch THEM eat?!

nc said...

Nanny from Fargo,

Did you end up e-mailing him?? What was his response???


a reader is Manny Poppins said...

Nanny from Fargo,

As I've said above, I agree. #27's presentation creates a bad feeling within the pit of my stomach and I support and do encourage your investigation. I strongly disagree with anyone suggesting that your investigation would be wrong as the potential good of saving a child from a bad situation or the inherent good in ascertaining the truth far outweighs whatever harm might exist in a little misrepresentation. In fact, kudos to you for the effort.

However, setting #27 aside...

I want to comment on your preoccupation and the preoccupation of others with a male caregiver preferring a girl to care for. My effort here will be to provide some food for thought.

I'm a male caregiver and the vast majority of my experience has been with girls, and like almost any member of our species I've come to prefer situations I'm used to. This was never by design, I had no malevolent intent at start and I have no malevolent intent now, I'm a good person, it's just how things turned out. I would not be so foolish as to ever deny a position with boys, I consider a position on merits.

I consider a position on merits, just as I expect to be evaluated as a caregiver. I'm in my mid-twenties, and as a babysitter for more than a decade and a nanny of several years, I have plenty of experience with boys. On the other hand, I'm not the sports, sports and more sports type that a lot of folks seem to believe every male nanny to be. Rather, I enjoy walks, hikes, building sandcastles, blowing bubbles, flying a kite, drawing for hours on end with chalk, battling with foam swords, Nerf gun fights and so on as children of both genders do. So I will handle boys just fine.

Nevertheless it remains true that the majority of my experience is with girls, and beyond that, when it comes to behavior I've found girls to usually be more well behaved, more apt to listen and call me crazy, but I like that. When it comes to indoor activities I'm best suited for such as crafts, cooking and pretending to be a plush horse named Mr. Hallow (he's a rather sophisticated old horse who speaks with a very poorly done English accent), or singing "A Spoonful of Sugar" - and yes I do sing it, and girls tend to be more interested in these things. Also, girls tend to be more clingy in the attention sense and I'm the involved and protective type.

(INFJ if you subscribe to that sort of thing.)

More to the point, given a sweet voice and a please, and I'll do virtually anything for my charges like Al Bundy in Married with Children when Kelly asked, "Daddy, beat him up."

So while I'd never be stupid enough to state a preference in an ad, email or any communication with a potential new family with society's bias being what it is, all else being equal, I would choose girls over boys and I would do so with good reason. I would do so to provide only the highest level of care I could, to protect them in any way I could and with no malevolent intent of any sort, and I can't be the only one on Earth.

So please, I beg you, remember I'm out there and others may be too.

Thank you.

Side bar: a spoon full of sugar does *not* help the medicine go down. I tried this as a child, take my word, don't try it. :D

a reader gone correcting said...

"and girls tend to be more interested in these things."

shouldn't have had the "and"

It reads weird with it.

nc said...

a reader is Manny Poppins,

You bring up a good point. Thanks for that food for thought.

a reader said...


No problem. Thank you for listening. :)

Christina said...

#2: "voted for Barack Obama"

Thank goodness I've never had a job or interview where that mattered.

Nanny from Fargo said...

I went to the sitter site, but they require credit card and phone number info for any contact :/ The C-list ad was removed. So, so far no luck.

I submitted #27 said...

I submitted #27 and included the Craigslist link that was active at the time. The ad was brought to my attention on a Los Angeles Moms Internet Message Board. A single mom, strapped for cash was asking other mom's opinions about the ad. She shared Paul's e-mail in that message board thread (so that's why I was able to provide it here). She also indicated she was able to look the guy up and he was the son of Hollywood entertainers (as I recall) and he said he didn't need money.

Anyway, as the economy is terrible, Los Angeles is expensive and frankly people make poor decisions esp when desperate, I thought I would send this in here. Everyone on the thread pretty unanimously told her to pass and to even consider alert CPS (Child Protective Services). But interesting to see that this mom had a community to toss this out to, what about a desperate mom who just got sucked in? Maybe the guy is fine. Who knows. I hope this was helpful further info.