Today at Target, I let my son play with a toy, bite on it, drool on it, etc on it. Then, I put it back. I never really intended to buy it. But I knew he would like to play with it for a couple minutes. Then it hit me: I am part of the problem.
He didn't do damage to the toy--it was just drooly and wet. The rest of the consumers will probably think that is gross. They may be right. But at the time, I didn't really care about what other people thought.
Do other parents out there act crazy and irresponsible like this? Or am I the only one? Or is this one of those things, like pooping, that people do but don't talk about?
15.12.07
29.11.07
Christmas Mania
The time has come. I am finally a parent at Christmas. Now I have to answer the ever important question: how much stuff should I buy my child for Christmas?
When I was growing up, we always had lots of presents, but they were mostly small--socks, pajamas, etc. We would get a couple medium presents, and maybe one big one. We never got the kinds of things I see my students getting now: Ipods, PSPs, etc. My parents found a way to make the holidays special on a budget, without spoiling us.
One thing my mom really focused on was talking about the wanting. Wanting is what makes life exciting, what motivates me to work hard and to behave. Anticipation and desire are among the most important and fun feelings around. When I was little, I actually felt sad in my heart for the spoiled rich kids who had nothing left to want because they were given everything they could ask for. I was so grateful to be regular, in a family on a budget.
As a parent, I want to recreate the values my parents instilled in me. However, I also have the American Desire tendencies--I want my child to have everything I never had. My first instinct is to buy everything I see. So far, I have gotten a keyboard, a basketball, 3 pajama outfits, 4 onsies, a foam floor mat puzzle, and a stuffed pony. I also plan to get him some socks and shoes. Now, most of these things are items he needs, or that I want him to have. Plus, he's too young to understand what all he gets. But I worry about setting a precedent.
I have heard from other families that they have a system for gift giving. For example, they might give three gifts per child, because that is how many Baby Jesus got. I like that idea, but I am not sure I am ready to let go of the vision of a Christmas tree surrounded by mounds and mounds of presents.
Ideas? Suggestions?
When I was growing up, we always had lots of presents, but they were mostly small--socks, pajamas, etc. We would get a couple medium presents, and maybe one big one. We never got the kinds of things I see my students getting now: Ipods, PSPs, etc. My parents found a way to make the holidays special on a budget, without spoiling us.
One thing my mom really focused on was talking about the wanting. Wanting is what makes life exciting, what motivates me to work hard and to behave. Anticipation and desire are among the most important and fun feelings around. When I was little, I actually felt sad in my heart for the spoiled rich kids who had nothing left to want because they were given everything they could ask for. I was so grateful to be regular, in a family on a budget.
As a parent, I want to recreate the values my parents instilled in me. However, I also have the American Desire tendencies--I want my child to have everything I never had. My first instinct is to buy everything I see. So far, I have gotten a keyboard, a basketball, 3 pajama outfits, 4 onsies, a foam floor mat puzzle, and a stuffed pony. I also plan to get him some socks and shoes. Now, most of these things are items he needs, or that I want him to have. Plus, he's too young to understand what all he gets. But I worry about setting a precedent.
I have heard from other families that they have a system for gift giving. For example, they might give three gifts per child, because that is how many Baby Jesus got. I like that idea, but I am not sure I am ready to let go of the vision of a Christmas tree surrounded by mounds and mounds of presents.
Ideas? Suggestions?
25.11.07
Sick Kids
I have had to deal with sick kids before, but never my own. It is very difficult. My son has been fighting all sorts of sickness in the last couple of weeks: stomach flu, a cold, pink eye, a double ear infection, and an allergic reaction to a medicine. Fortunately for everyone, he is a cheerful kid and has not been too fussy. But that leads to problems, too.
My main concern is that I don't know when he is in pain. He is too young to comunicate clearly, so I have to watch for signs. But he's so cheery all the time, I don't know if that means he is really doing fine. He is covered head to toe with a red rash. The doctor said it is a reaction to the ear infection medicine, but it looks like chicken pox. I believe the doctor, but I have this instinct to assume he is itchy. I am sure he isn't, but I can't let go of the idea of itchyness.
Meanwhile, I am fighting what is probably the worst cold I've ever had. If he is feeling the same as I am, he must be miserable. But if he were miserable, wouldn't he let me know somehow?
I know I am not nearly done dealing with sick kids in my life. But I am looking forward to my son having enough communication skills to let me know what's wrong with him.
My main concern is that I don't know when he is in pain. He is too young to comunicate clearly, so I have to watch for signs. But he's so cheery all the time, I don't know if that means he is really doing fine. He is covered head to toe with a red rash. The doctor said it is a reaction to the ear infection medicine, but it looks like chicken pox. I believe the doctor, but I have this instinct to assume he is itchy. I am sure he isn't, but I can't let go of the idea of itchyness.
Meanwhile, I am fighting what is probably the worst cold I've ever had. If he is feeling the same as I am, he must be miserable. But if he were miserable, wouldn't he let me know somehow?
I know I am not nearly done dealing with sick kids in my life. But I am looking forward to my son having enough communication skills to let me know what's wrong with him.
20.11.07
Vegetarian Gripes, Part 1
I figured that it would be a challenge to raise a vegetarian kid. I figured that at some point, Fox would go to a friend's house, and the friend's parents would forget and feed him meat. I assumed I would face challenges like that. But I didn't think it would happen so soon.
My son is 10 months old. Today, at daycare, someone fed him a cheeseburger. When my husband first told me, I was shocked. How could that even happen? I made it clear through communications with his teachers, both orally and in writing, that Fox is not to eat meat. I suppose with the holiday things are out of sorts, because someone who isn't normally in the infant room was the one in charge of him, and she didn't know. She felt bad.
Well, she should feel bad. What if Fox had an allergy? What if we had a religious stance that forbade eating beef? What if, what if. This is a big deal to me. Our family has made a conscious decision to be vegetarian, and it is something we take very seriously. It seems so irresponsible to me to be so careless as to disregard the wishes and practices of a family. Not everyone in the world is vegetarian, I know that. But I think every family has certain views on how things should be done. Some parents spank, while others are against that. Some let their babies cry it out, while others rock them to sleep each night. Some feed them meat, others don't. How difficult can it be to be mindful and respectful of what we feel is right? We do pay 215$ a week for three days of care. Is it too much to ask?
My son is 10 months old. Today, at daycare, someone fed him a cheeseburger. When my husband first told me, I was shocked. How could that even happen? I made it clear through communications with his teachers, both orally and in writing, that Fox is not to eat meat. I suppose with the holiday things are out of sorts, because someone who isn't normally in the infant room was the one in charge of him, and she didn't know. She felt bad.
Well, she should feel bad. What if Fox had an allergy? What if we had a religious stance that forbade eating beef? What if, what if. This is a big deal to me. Our family has made a conscious decision to be vegetarian, and it is something we take very seriously. It seems so irresponsible to me to be so careless as to disregard the wishes and practices of a family. Not everyone in the world is vegetarian, I know that. But I think every family has certain views on how things should be done. Some parents spank, while others are against that. Some let their babies cry it out, while others rock them to sleep each night. Some feed them meat, others don't. How difficult can it be to be mindful and respectful of what we feel is right? We do pay 215$ a week for three days of care. Is it too much to ask?
30.10.07
On the Clock
If a doctor saw someone get hit by a car, would you expect her to go help the victim? Me too. And so, as a teacher, I scold kids, even if they aren't my students. It's my duty.
If we want our children to be happy, safe, well-rounded people, adults must be supportive of and responsible to/for all young ones. But sometimes I wonder if I am going too far. I take charge of kids over whom I have no dominion. And I think it is going to get me in trouble someday.
The first time someone pointed this habit out to me was at a youth basketball tournement. It was in Sauk Centre, two hours away from where I live and work. A couple young, unsupervised kids were throwing a bouncy ball against a window. Of course, I asked them to stop and put the ball away, because they could break the window. It seemed like the normal reaction. If a kids was doing that at my school, I would have reacted that way. But PV acted like I was a crazy person.
The second time this happened was in our neighborhood. PV and I were walking with our baby when he was a few months old. Some boys (brothers, I think, around 8 and 10) walked past us. PV said hi, which offended them (we are strangers, after all). But after we had walked past, I noticed rocks flying in our general direction. I turned around and scolded the boys, telling them they needed to go home NOW. As we walked away, PV again acted like I was a crazy person. I still say I did the right thing.
Then yesterday, I saw two boys (maybe around 5th grade) beating up a chubby boy with glasses near my school (not our students). I broke it up and proceded to yell at the two boys. Seriously, I was scary. Those of you who know me would not have recognized me. I feel strongly that I did the right thing, and I don't think anyone would argue against me--there was a kid getting beat up, after all! But I can imagine some parents being upset. Who I am to intervene? Who am I to yell at their kids? If the boys had said, "You're not the boss of us! We don't have to listen to you!" what could I have said? But still.
I plan to continue doing what I think is right, even if I don't have jurisdiction, because that is what people should do. But I am fully expecting to get an earful one of these days.
If we want our children to be happy, safe, well-rounded people, adults must be supportive of and responsible to/for all young ones. But sometimes I wonder if I am going too far. I take charge of kids over whom I have no dominion. And I think it is going to get me in trouble someday.
The first time someone pointed this habit out to me was at a youth basketball tournement. It was in Sauk Centre, two hours away from where I live and work. A couple young, unsupervised kids were throwing a bouncy ball against a window. Of course, I asked them to stop and put the ball away, because they could break the window. It seemed like the normal reaction. If a kids was doing that at my school, I would have reacted that way. But PV acted like I was a crazy person.
The second time this happened was in our neighborhood. PV and I were walking with our baby when he was a few months old. Some boys (brothers, I think, around 8 and 10) walked past us. PV said hi, which offended them (we are strangers, after all). But after we had walked past, I noticed rocks flying in our general direction. I turned around and scolded the boys, telling them they needed to go home NOW. As we walked away, PV again acted like I was a crazy person. I still say I did the right thing.
Then yesterday, I saw two boys (maybe around 5th grade) beating up a chubby boy with glasses near my school (not our students). I broke it up and proceded to yell at the two boys. Seriously, I was scary. Those of you who know me would not have recognized me. I feel strongly that I did the right thing, and I don't think anyone would argue against me--there was a kid getting beat up, after all! But I can imagine some parents being upset. Who I am to intervene? Who am I to yell at their kids? If the boys had said, "You're not the boss of us! We don't have to listen to you!" what could I have said? But still.
I plan to continue doing what I think is right, even if I don't have jurisdiction, because that is what people should do. But I am fully expecting to get an earful one of these days.
23.10.07
Trick or Treat!
For those of you who know me, you may have heard this tirade before. I apologize for any repetition.
Most people have an idea of what age people should be to go trick or treating. Little kids are fine. 10 year olds are okay. High schoolers? They are too old.
I disagree. Why should teenagers be left out of the fun experiences of life, like trick or treating? Halloween is a really exciting time for kids, and it only comes once a year. For many teens, participating in the festivities is a way to hang onto childhood just a bit longer. Life may be full of romance problems, chores, arguing with parents, peer pressure, understanding sexuality, getting a job, and feeling numerous conflicting emotions. But on one day, you can dress up like a ninja, giggle with your friends, and eat a bunch of free candy. How great is that?
And what would be the alternative? I know I am bordering on 'old,' but I doubt the world has changed super-drastically since I was a teenager. And I remember what we were doing when we weren't trick or treating. Believe me, its much better for society as a whole to have teens begging candy rather than getting wasted and egging houses.
As a high school teacher, I see that the world treats teens poorly. They are displaced. They don't fit into the adult world, nor are they children. As if they don't have enough stress, they have to face the fact that they don't quite belong. The last thing they need to hear is a snide comment like "Aren't you a little old for this?" Maybe they are. But they don't need to be told. Just give them candy, wish them a happy day, and let them remain innocent and youthful one day longer.
Most people have an idea of what age people should be to go trick or treating. Little kids are fine. 10 year olds are okay. High schoolers? They are too old.
I disagree. Why should teenagers be left out of the fun experiences of life, like trick or treating? Halloween is a really exciting time for kids, and it only comes once a year. For many teens, participating in the festivities is a way to hang onto childhood just a bit longer. Life may be full of romance problems, chores, arguing with parents, peer pressure, understanding sexuality, getting a job, and feeling numerous conflicting emotions. But on one day, you can dress up like a ninja, giggle with your friends, and eat a bunch of free candy. How great is that?
And what would be the alternative? I know I am bordering on 'old,' but I doubt the world has changed super-drastically since I was a teenager. And I remember what we were doing when we weren't trick or treating. Believe me, its much better for society as a whole to have teens begging candy rather than getting wasted and egging houses.
As a high school teacher, I see that the world treats teens poorly. They are displaced. They don't fit into the adult world, nor are they children. As if they don't have enough stress, they have to face the fact that they don't quite belong. The last thing they need to hear is a snide comment like "Aren't you a little old for this?" Maybe they are. But they don't need to be told. Just give them candy, wish them a happy day, and let them remain innocent and youthful one day longer.
9.10.07
Fatherhood and Masculinity
(this is Pacifist Viking)
This week's Time magazine has an article by Lisa Takeuchi Cullen and Lev Grossman called "Fatherhood 2.0," discussing stay-at-home dads, changing expectations of modern fatherhood, and how definitions of masculinity are being changed. Read it if you are so inclined, but two things struck me while reading this article.
First, it feels like an article that was written 20 years ago, today! If you're a father, you're going feel like the article describes the life you take for granted as if it's something new.
Second, I'm just exhausted by by rigid social perceptions and expectations of gender roles. I feel consciously aware of such business, and I actively attempt to analyze and move beyond these stereotypes, but more and more I'm required to recognize that for most, conventional definitions of feminine and masculine behavior are still quite strong.
This week's Time magazine has an article by Lisa Takeuchi Cullen and Lev Grossman called "Fatherhood 2.0," discussing stay-at-home dads, changing expectations of modern fatherhood, and how definitions of masculinity are being changed. Read it if you are so inclined, but two things struck me while reading this article.
First, it feels like an article that was written 20 years ago, today! If you're a father, you're going feel like the article describes the life you take for granted as if it's something new.
Second, I'm just exhausted by by rigid social perceptions and expectations of gender roles. I feel consciously aware of such business, and I actively attempt to analyze and move beyond these stereotypes, but more and more I'm required to recognize that for most, conventional definitions of feminine and masculine behavior are still quite strong.
4.10.07
Pampers
I learned something interesting this week. If you use Pampers, you can join an online thing and earn points toward toys and books. If you are going to buy diapers anyway, why not buys some that give something back? Also, the last two bags of diapers I bought came with coupons for 1.50$ off. I'm sold.
2.9.07
Skol Vikings!
PV and I now are season ticket holders to the Vikings. This is very exciting to both of us, but the timing is sort of messed up. I haven't been to a game in a couple years, and now I would be able to go to 8 of them, except for one thing: I have a baby. I don't especially feel like working full time and taking 6 hours out of my weekend to leave him with a babysitter.
So, this stinks. If I go to the games, I'll feel bad. If I don't go, I'll feel cheated. What to do? How about this: can I take the baby with me?
Right now, he is 7 1/2 months. He's pretty easygoing. He doesn't fuss or cry much. He likes bright lights and stuff. He wouldn't need a ticket. Sounds good so far.
Our concern is the noise. Every year (every game?) the announcers talk about how visiting teams hate to play in the Metrodome because the noise is outrageous. Maybe all teams say that about their stadiums, I don't know. But I have been there, and it is VERY loud to me. I know lots of people bring babies to Twins games (I have heard, at least), but that is baseball. The game itself is more relaxed and quiet, the fans are a different sort of crowd, and the games rarely sell out, so there are fewer voices to add to the chaos. Football is a whole different world.
PV and I took the baby to a wedding in June, and it was pretty loud (much quieter than a Vikings game, though). We ended up leaving early because he was so upset. However, that was at like 10 at night, and his normal bedtime is 7:00-ish. Outside factors made him cranky. So, part of me thinks a noon game wouldn't be that hard for him to cope with. He might even have fun! We don't want to risk having to leave because he is freaking out, but it would be great if we could make it work to bring him along.
We probably won't try bringing him until October sometime, because PV's dad is coming for the Falcons game, and we aren't going to take any chances with the Packer game. The baby will be 9 months old by then. Does anyone have any ideas for how to help a baby enjoy a loud football game? Any experiences to share?
So, this stinks. If I go to the games, I'll feel bad. If I don't go, I'll feel cheated. What to do? How about this: can I take the baby with me?
Right now, he is 7 1/2 months. He's pretty easygoing. He doesn't fuss or cry much. He likes bright lights and stuff. He wouldn't need a ticket. Sounds good so far.
Our concern is the noise. Every year (every game?) the announcers talk about how visiting teams hate to play in the Metrodome because the noise is outrageous. Maybe all teams say that about their stadiums, I don't know. But I have been there, and it is VERY loud to me. I know lots of people bring babies to Twins games (I have heard, at least), but that is baseball. The game itself is more relaxed and quiet, the fans are a different sort of crowd, and the games rarely sell out, so there are fewer voices to add to the chaos. Football is a whole different world.
PV and I took the baby to a wedding in June, and it was pretty loud (much quieter than a Vikings game, though). We ended up leaving early because he was so upset. However, that was at like 10 at night, and his normal bedtime is 7:00-ish. Outside factors made him cranky. So, part of me thinks a noon game wouldn't be that hard for him to cope with. He might even have fun! We don't want to risk having to leave because he is freaking out, but it would be great if we could make it work to bring him along.
We probably won't try bringing him until October sometime, because PV's dad is coming for the Falcons game, and we aren't going to take any chances with the Packer game. The baby will be 9 months old by then. Does anyone have any ideas for how to help a baby enjoy a loud football game? Any experiences to share?
31.8.07
Loveys
How many of you had a lovey when you were a child? Most people I talk to had a stuffed animal, toy, or blanket that was especially important. I had a blanket. His name was Banky. That is, his name is Banky. I plan to have him until he dissolves entirely (which should happen quite soon, by the look of things).
I don't think many parents have an issue with small children having a lovey. A book I am reading suggests introducing one at nap and bed times to help your baby feel comforted, especially once the baby starts a new schedule (like day care). My son begins daycare Tuesday, so this week we adopted Stripey:
My baby seems to love Stripey, and now he doesn't make a peep when we lay him down to go to sleep, even when he seems energetic. I feel confident that he will handle the transition to daycare well, because he will have a familiar-looking and -smelling companion.
Loveys have an important job of comforting kids. The issue, then, is how long should a child keep a lovey? I know many parents are uncomfortable with a child clinging to a blanket or animal over a certain age, maybe 3 or 4. To these people, I ask why? What's the problem with a kid having an item that comforts him or her?
I suppose for some kids, an extreme attachment to a lovey may interfere with their lives (especially socially). Some parents deal with this by chucking the lovey. I have known parents who threw it out while the kid was at school. What could be more traumatic that coming home and finding out the people you trust and love the most deceived you by destroying the item you trust and love the most? If my parents had done this, I don't think I would have been able to forgive them and trust them again. Instead of throwing loveys away, wouldn't it be better to set up rules of when the child is allowed to hold it? It could be locked up except at bedtime, for example. It seems there must be some way to make it work.
The job of a lovey is to be familiar and make the child feel safe. It reminds the kid of home and family. When going through periods of change (growth, divorce, new siblings, moving, going to school or daycare, losing a pet, etc), the lovey remains a consistent reminder to the child that there are some things that will always be the same, some 'friends' that will always love him or her. Who doesn't need that kind of reminder on a daily basis? I know I still do. So, as a grown up mommy, I admit I still love my Banky and sleep with him every night. You may think I'm weird, but I know I'm not the only one. And he still does his job.
I don't think many parents have an issue with small children having a lovey. A book I am reading suggests introducing one at nap and bed times to help your baby feel comforted, especially once the baby starts a new schedule (like day care). My son begins daycare Tuesday, so this week we adopted Stripey:
My baby seems to love Stripey, and now he doesn't make a peep when we lay him down to go to sleep, even when he seems energetic. I feel confident that he will handle the transition to daycare well, because he will have a familiar-looking and -smelling companion.
Loveys have an important job of comforting kids. The issue, then, is how long should a child keep a lovey? I know many parents are uncomfortable with a child clinging to a blanket or animal over a certain age, maybe 3 or 4. To these people, I ask why? What's the problem with a kid having an item that comforts him or her?
I suppose for some kids, an extreme attachment to a lovey may interfere with their lives (especially socially). Some parents deal with this by chucking the lovey. I have known parents who threw it out while the kid was at school. What could be more traumatic that coming home and finding out the people you trust and love the most deceived you by destroying the item you trust and love the most? If my parents had done this, I don't think I would have been able to forgive them and trust them again. Instead of throwing loveys away, wouldn't it be better to set up rules of when the child is allowed to hold it? It could be locked up except at bedtime, for example. It seems there must be some way to make it work.
The job of a lovey is to be familiar and make the child feel safe. It reminds the kid of home and family. When going through periods of change (growth, divorce, new siblings, moving, going to school or daycare, losing a pet, etc), the lovey remains a consistent reminder to the child that there are some things that will always be the same, some 'friends' that will always love him or her. Who doesn't need that kind of reminder on a daily basis? I know I still do. So, as a grown up mommy, I admit I still love my Banky and sleep with him every night. You may think I'm weird, but I know I'm not the only one. And he still does his job.
27.8.07
Babies at the Fair
Living in St. Paul, I always feel like a tool if I don't make it to the state fair at least once each year. When I was younger, I went every day, and I had a blast. Lately I haven't been going as much, and for this I blame my husband, who doesn't like fairs, carnivals, parades, festivals, or any sort of fun community events.
Now that I am a mother, I wonder if my visits to the fair will increase or decrease. My son is 7 months old right now; I try to imagine what it would be like to have him there. Would it work to push a big stroller around? Would I need to buy a smaller umbrella stroller for the occasion? Would it be better to wear him in the Baby Bjorn? Where will I be able to comfortably breastfeed? Are there kidnappers and careless drunkards about?
And as he grows, will I need to worry about him running off and getting lost? How much should I expect to spend on food, rides, and souvenirs? It is worth all this stress?
Part of me is tempted to swear off the fair because of the hassle. But then I think back to my childhood; every summer, my family took a trip to Valleyfair and the State Fair. I remember looking forward to it all year. We went early in the morning and stayed all day, and the whole family (even my dad, who worked nights) was a part of it. When I think about these things, I am reminded of how much I love the fair.
Shouldn't I try to provide the same fun traditions for my child that my parents had for me and my sister? I feel like I owe him that. And shouldn't I indulge myself once a year and do something special and exciting? It seems to me a lot of what parents do 'for their children' is actually for themselves. But I don't see anything wrong with that. Parents are hard-working people! We deserve special treatment every now and then, so long as we aren't neglecting our responsibilities to our kids.
I guess I convinced myself--I want to go to the fair. I want to go every year. So I guess this brings me back to my original questions: should I use the big stroller, umbrella stroller, or Baby Bjorn? Breastfeeding? Any ideas?
Now that I am a mother, I wonder if my visits to the fair will increase or decrease. My son is 7 months old right now; I try to imagine what it would be like to have him there. Would it work to push a big stroller around? Would I need to buy a smaller umbrella stroller for the occasion? Would it be better to wear him in the Baby Bjorn? Where will I be able to comfortably breastfeed? Are there kidnappers and careless drunkards about?
And as he grows, will I need to worry about him running off and getting lost? How much should I expect to spend on food, rides, and souvenirs? It is worth all this stress?
Part of me is tempted to swear off the fair because of the hassle. But then I think back to my childhood; every summer, my family took a trip to Valleyfair and the State Fair. I remember looking forward to it all year. We went early in the morning and stayed all day, and the whole family (even my dad, who worked nights) was a part of it. When I think about these things, I am reminded of how much I love the fair.
Shouldn't I try to provide the same fun traditions for my child that my parents had for me and my sister? I feel like I owe him that. And shouldn't I indulge myself once a year and do something special and exciting? It seems to me a lot of what parents do 'for their children' is actually for themselves. But I don't see anything wrong with that. Parents are hard-working people! We deserve special treatment every now and then, so long as we aren't neglecting our responsibilities to our kids.
I guess I convinced myself--I want to go to the fair. I want to go every year. So I guess this brings me back to my original questions: should I use the big stroller, umbrella stroller, or Baby Bjorn? Breastfeeding? Any ideas?
21.8.07
Raising a Vegetarian Child, Part 1
When I tell people that I am raising my son as a vegetarian, most people try unsuccessfully to hide their disapproval. Although there are a few people who seem to support and be excited about the idea, most think it is a choice that is going to be a big pain and make my kid miserable. I even have gotten a couple, "Poor kid!"s. Well, raising a vegetarian child does not have to be a bother and it does not mean sacrifice on the part of the child. Many common assumptions can be easily proven wrong.
Your kid is going to miss out on so much good food.
Tofu is nutritious, but it is an acquired taste. Fortunately, there are also veggie versions of hamburgers, hot dogs, ground beef, steak strips, sausages, bacon, turkey, corn dogs, chicken patties and nuggets, and more. Just because a person is a vegetarian doesn't mean he or she won't be able to enjoy the foods the rest of the world is eating. Our version is just healthier, and slightly more expensive.
He'll feel weird when singled out from his friends.
This doesn't need to happen. Most day cares are willing to work with vegetarian families and prepare a meat-free meal that is similar to what the other kids are eating. Schools in many districts are required to provide a vegetarian alternative. And simple communication with parents of your kid's friends can help avoid awkward situations (ex: if he or she is invited to a birthday party serving hot dogs on the bonfire, you can send along veggie dogs).
Let the kid have a darn Happy Meal!
We all know fast food is not a healthy choice. If possible, we should avoid it entirely. But sometimes it is just too tempting. Being a vegetarian doesn't mean you can't enjoy fast food. We all know about the side dishes (fries, fiesta potatoes, etc). But there are vegetarian "main course" foods too: Burger King even has a veggie burger. I only recently learned of the BK veggie burger, and it is pretty tasty (they use a Morningstar patty). If you ask, they will probably sub it into a kids meal. You can also get vegetarian kids meals at Taco Bell and Subway (although at Subway, you have to get meat sandwich with no meat). And these options are much less fattening than their meaty counterparts that give fast food a bad name.
Your kid is going to miss out on so much good food.
Tofu is nutritious, but it is an acquired taste. Fortunately, there are also veggie versions of hamburgers, hot dogs, ground beef, steak strips, sausages, bacon, turkey, corn dogs, chicken patties and nuggets, and more. Just because a person is a vegetarian doesn't mean he or she won't be able to enjoy the foods the rest of the world is eating. Our version is just healthier, and slightly more expensive.
He'll feel weird when singled out from his friends.
This doesn't need to happen. Most day cares are willing to work with vegetarian families and prepare a meat-free meal that is similar to what the other kids are eating. Schools in many districts are required to provide a vegetarian alternative. And simple communication with parents of your kid's friends can help avoid awkward situations (ex: if he or she is invited to a birthday party serving hot dogs on the bonfire, you can send along veggie dogs).
Let the kid have a darn Happy Meal!
We all know fast food is not a healthy choice. If possible, we should avoid it entirely. But sometimes it is just too tempting. Being a vegetarian doesn't mean you can't enjoy fast food. We all know about the side dishes (fries, fiesta potatoes, etc). But there are vegetarian "main course" foods too: Burger King even has a veggie burger. I only recently learned of the BK veggie burger, and it is pretty tasty (they use a Morningstar patty). If you ask, they will probably sub it into a kids meal. You can also get vegetarian kids meals at Taco Bell and Subway (although at Subway, you have to get meat sandwich with no meat). And these options are much less fattening than their meaty counterparts that give fast food a bad name.
7.8.07
Aunts and Uncles
There has been some discussion in my house and among some friends about who deserves the titles of aunt and uncle. I seem to throw it around willy nilly. All my friends are Aunt Becky, Auntie Kristin, Aunt Stacy, etc. This has caused some confusion for people, who then ask if said "aunt" is my sister or my husband's. I don't mind this, but I think some people feel a more traditional use of the title is appropriate.
When I was very young, I didn't realize there was a difference between my mom's and dad's siblings and their spouses; they were all aunts and uncles. Now, I know that sometimes those couples split up, and one has the potential to disappear. Is one an aunt or uncle only if there is no risk of them dropping out of the family?
I also give the title to the boyfriends and girlfriends of the true aunts and uncles. They are, after all, filling the role of aunt or uncle, for the time being. And there is potential for them to really become the aunt or uncle (as is the case with Uncle Jon, who just proposed to Aunt Jacque--yay!). Of course, there is also the possibility of a break up.
We also have to consider step-families (aunts, uncles, brothers, parents, grandparents). In my life, I tried my best to consider them truly to be family (in most cases), but that was more difficult. If someone joins your life when you are at a certain maturity level, it is practically impossible to overcome the natural boundaries, especially if you have emotional issues.
So, what is an aunt? What is an uncle? Does blood make a difference, or are love and commitment the important ingredients? I like to think my family has room for anyone who wants to be a member. But when you have kids, you need to reassess your actions and their effects on the little ones. Is it going to confuse a child to grow up hearing "Uncle Abe," only to realize at age 12 that Uncle Abe is just some dude who we call uncle, and not really an uncle at all? The terms aunt and uncle, for a little kid, are supposed to serve a purpose of helping them grasp what a family is and how it operates.
Also, if someone is not a permanent member of the family, is it fair to a child to use the title, knowing they could go away? Are we then teaching kids that a family is a group of people who love each other for now? If uncle Brad disappears for a year, could Daddy do the same? Children should know that a family is forever, connected by bonds that cannot be broken.
So, what to do? I am sure I am over-thinking this, but I am curious to know what others think and how they use the title.
When I was very young, I didn't realize there was a difference between my mom's and dad's siblings and their spouses; they were all aunts and uncles. Now, I know that sometimes those couples split up, and one has the potential to disappear. Is one an aunt or uncle only if there is no risk of them dropping out of the family?
I also give the title to the boyfriends and girlfriends of the true aunts and uncles. They are, after all, filling the role of aunt or uncle, for the time being. And there is potential for them to really become the aunt or uncle (as is the case with Uncle Jon, who just proposed to Aunt Jacque--yay!). Of course, there is also the possibility of a break up.
We also have to consider step-families (aunts, uncles, brothers, parents, grandparents). In my life, I tried my best to consider them truly to be family (in most cases), but that was more difficult. If someone joins your life when you are at a certain maturity level, it is practically impossible to overcome the natural boundaries, especially if you have emotional issues.
So, what is an aunt? What is an uncle? Does blood make a difference, or are love and commitment the important ingredients? I like to think my family has room for anyone who wants to be a member. But when you have kids, you need to reassess your actions and their effects on the little ones. Is it going to confuse a child to grow up hearing "Uncle Abe," only to realize at age 12 that Uncle Abe is just some dude who we call uncle, and not really an uncle at all? The terms aunt and uncle, for a little kid, are supposed to serve a purpose of helping them grasp what a family is and how it operates.
Also, if someone is not a permanent member of the family, is it fair to a child to use the title, knowing they could go away? Are we then teaching kids that a family is a group of people who love each other for now? If uncle Brad disappears for a year, could Daddy do the same? Children should know that a family is forever, connected by bonds that cannot be broken.
So, what to do? I am sure I am over-thinking this, but I am curious to know what others think and how they use the title.
5.8.07
Materialism and Toys
This is a guest post by Pacifist Viking
You don't want to raise kids to be materialistic; you want kids to grow up knowing there are more important things than possessions.
But as little kids, they need toys. Toys are a necessary part of their development. The toys help them engage with the world. It is with toys that they learn how the world responds to them, and they practice and develop the use of their hands and their eyes and everything else. A baby playing with a toy is learning and reaching out into the world.
So there are all these toys that serve a functional, utilitarian, practical, developmental purpose. But then as we age, we don't need the toys to develop, and the materialism can become a hindrance in many ways (consumer debt is, after all, out of control in this country, and today I heard a sermon about "treasures in heaven" and "treasures on earth").
Oh, don't worry: I'm no secular monk who is going to forbid my child from playing with toys. I played with beloved toys very late into life (as in, I still collect football cards and Star Wars toys), and our son will play with lots and lots of toys.
But Cruelty-Free Mommy and I have done a fairly good job balancing our wants from our needs. We are very responsible with our money, because we know what we can and cannot afford, and what we do and do not need.
And for me, at least, that's a lesson I received from my parents. My parents have provided me with many toys and fun things throughout life (and obviously a lot more support, too). And still, they taught me to save money, to balance "choices and consequences," to be responsible and reasonable, and to know wants from needs. Furthermore, while I do have materialistic desire for things like football cards, this hasn't in any significant way hindered any spiritual yearnings and searchings on my part; I live with the recognition that I will die, and that material possessions mean little to nothing in the big picture.
So as far as I can see, there doesn't have to be a conflict. You can provide children with toys, while still teaching kids to be responsible and reasonable, and still teaching kids that there are bigger spiritual, emotional, and mental needs than possessions can fulfill. It doesn't seem to me that mistakes come from having the toys themselves, but perhaps in how we treat the toys. But providing kids with lots and lots of toys does not in itself make them materialistic people, just like violent entertainment does not in itself make them violent people. If parents do a good job at the more important things (like providing constant love, support, teaching, and time), these other things don't tend to harm.
You don't want to raise kids to be materialistic; you want kids to grow up knowing there are more important things than possessions.
But as little kids, they need toys. Toys are a necessary part of their development. The toys help them engage with the world. It is with toys that they learn how the world responds to them, and they practice and develop the use of their hands and their eyes and everything else. A baby playing with a toy is learning and reaching out into the world.
So there are all these toys that serve a functional, utilitarian, practical, developmental purpose. But then as we age, we don't need the toys to develop, and the materialism can become a hindrance in many ways (consumer debt is, after all, out of control in this country, and today I heard a sermon about "treasures in heaven" and "treasures on earth").
Oh, don't worry: I'm no secular monk who is going to forbid my child from playing with toys. I played with beloved toys very late into life (as in, I still collect football cards and Star Wars toys), and our son will play with lots and lots of toys.
But Cruelty-Free Mommy and I have done a fairly good job balancing our wants from our needs. We are very responsible with our money, because we know what we can and cannot afford, and what we do and do not need.
And for me, at least, that's a lesson I received from my parents. My parents have provided me with many toys and fun things throughout life (and obviously a lot more support, too). And still, they taught me to save money, to balance "choices and consequences," to be responsible and reasonable, and to know wants from needs. Furthermore, while I do have materialistic desire for things like football cards, this hasn't in any significant way hindered any spiritual yearnings and searchings on my part; I live with the recognition that I will die, and that material possessions mean little to nothing in the big picture.
So as far as I can see, there doesn't have to be a conflict. You can provide children with toys, while still teaching kids to be responsible and reasonable, and still teaching kids that there are bigger spiritual, emotional, and mental needs than possessions can fulfill. It doesn't seem to me that mistakes come from having the toys themselves, but perhaps in how we treat the toys. But providing kids with lots and lots of toys does not in itself make them materialistic people, just like violent entertainment does not in itself make them violent people. If parents do a good job at the more important things (like providing constant love, support, teaching, and time), these other things don't tend to harm.
29.7.07
My too-late idea
I recently had an idea that I wish I had come up with a month ago. I assume most children (like mine) enjoy looking at bring colors and lights. Fireworks, therefore, are ideal--they are exciting, sparkly, colorful, and--let's just be honest--they are FIRE in the SKY. This fireworks season, I didn't bring my son to watch any of the action, because I assumed the noises would be scary to a 6 month old (plus, he is well into dreamland by dark!).
Then I thought of this (which other people may have already come up with): headphones. When the next fireworks opportunity arises, I will put headphones on the kid and play some music he enjoys loud enough to distract from the explosions.
Has anyone else beat me to this and actually tried it? I would like to know how well (or poorly) it worked.
Then I thought of this (which other people may have already come up with): headphones. When the next fireworks opportunity arises, I will put headphones on the kid and play some music he enjoys loud enough to distract from the explosions.
Has anyone else beat me to this and actually tried it? I would like to know how well (or poorly) it worked.
25.7.07
On Beyond Potter: life after harry
I am going to skip the part where I lecture about how and why it is important to read. We've all heard it. But I will say that it is important for parents to read to, with, and in front of their kids to set a good example.
A woman I work with was telling me about how her family "only" has two copies of the new Harry Potter book. Her daughter had finished it already, her sons and husband were in the middle somewhere, and she was only on around 30 because she was graciously letting others read it first. As I listened, I thought enviously how great it would be to have something the whole family was so into. My husband and I tend to have different preferences for books. I hope, as our children grow, we can find things that attract us all, so we can eagerly read and discuss as a group.
A lot of people (adults and children) are mourning the end of the Harry Potter series. What next? I also am greiving on behalf of my son and unborn children; though they will probably (hopefully) read the books, they will most likely know the basic plot and maybe have seen the films ahead of time. They won't know the fun and excitement of waiting and waiting for the next book's release. They won't have the option of NOT having the ending spoiled for them. It's like Star Wars. There was never a time when I didn't know Vader was Luke's father--how cool would it have been to be in a theatre on opening night and hear that line? Dang.
Sad though it may be, we do have to move on beyond the Harry Potter series. Fortunately, there are lots of great books available that parents and kids together can read, or that can be read by either adults or grown ups alone. This is a great time for adolescent literature.
My suggestion, if you have kids you want to get (or keep) engaged in reading, is to hook them on a series. One reason Harry Potter was such a phenomenon was because readers got involved with the characters and the quest. There are loads of fantasy series people can use to fill the void. My personal favorite is the Alvin Maker series by Orson Scott Card. The first book, Seventh Son, is one of the best books I've read EVER--and I've read a lot of books. The books do not come off as childish or adolescent, but they are something young people could read and understand well, if they were able to handle the later Harry Potter books (which were pretty complicated, actually).
If you google "What to read after Harry Potter," you will find that there are lots of experts trying to help readers cope. For example, you could check here and here and here. Good luck, and keep reading!! It is good for you, your kids, and the world in general.
A woman I work with was telling me about how her family "only" has two copies of the new Harry Potter book. Her daughter had finished it already, her sons and husband were in the middle somewhere, and she was only on around 30 because she was graciously letting others read it first. As I listened, I thought enviously how great it would be to have something the whole family was so into. My husband and I tend to have different preferences for books. I hope, as our children grow, we can find things that attract us all, so we can eagerly read and discuss as a group.
A lot of people (adults and children) are mourning the end of the Harry Potter series. What next? I also am greiving on behalf of my son and unborn children; though they will probably (hopefully) read the books, they will most likely know the basic plot and maybe have seen the films ahead of time. They won't know the fun and excitement of waiting and waiting for the next book's release. They won't have the option of NOT having the ending spoiled for them. It's like Star Wars. There was never a time when I didn't know Vader was Luke's father--how cool would it have been to be in a theatre on opening night and hear that line? Dang.
Sad though it may be, we do have to move on beyond the Harry Potter series. Fortunately, there are lots of great books available that parents and kids together can read, or that can be read by either adults or grown ups alone. This is a great time for adolescent literature.
My suggestion, if you have kids you want to get (or keep) engaged in reading, is to hook them on a series. One reason Harry Potter was such a phenomenon was because readers got involved with the characters and the quest. There are loads of fantasy series people can use to fill the void. My personal favorite is the Alvin Maker series by Orson Scott Card. The first book, Seventh Son, is one of the best books I've read EVER--and I've read a lot of books. The books do not come off as childish or adolescent, but they are something young people could read and understand well, if they were able to handle the later Harry Potter books (which were pretty complicated, actually).
If you google "What to read after Harry Potter," you will find that there are lots of experts trying to help readers cope. For example, you could check here and here and here. Good luck, and keep reading!! It is good for you, your kids, and the world in general.
18.7.07
Lying to Children
(This is a guest post by Pacifist Viking)
Are you aware that millions of adults are consistently, repeatedly lying to children? That there is a massive conspiracy among adults to convince kids to believe lies that adults themselves do not believe? This conspiracy of serial dishonesty and deception against our children is largely accepted by the mass media, corporations, consumers, and parents. In fact, many parents are participating in this conspiracy of spreading lies used to manipulate the behavior of children.
If you feel children are not ready to be exposed to the sinister reality of this conspiracy, this is the time to make sure no children are looking at the screen. I am now ready to expose these lies.
There is no Santa Claus.
There is no Easter Bunny.
There is no Tooth Fairy.
No reasonable adult believes in a fat man living at the North Pole with a team of elves and reindeer helping him fly around the world to break into our homes. No reasonable adult believes there are rabbits that lay eggs and bring candy to children. And while some reasonable adults do believe in fairies, I am aware of no reasonable adult that believes in a fairy that pays children for their teeth.
And yet many people considered good parents do tell their children these lies. And if I attempted to tell children the truth about the non-existence of Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy, parents would be incredibly angry at me. Even as we teach our children the virtue of honesty, even as we teach them to tell the truth, parents lie to them about the existence of these beings that parents themselves do not believe in. This isn't a lie of omission either (we don't have to explain the realities of sex to children, and we should probably wait until they are older before allowing them to understand the realities of atrocities like genocide or war); it's a deliberate, active lie.
I don't wish to ask my son to believe in anything that I know not to be true. This doesn't mean his life will not be filled with wonder (the world is full of amazing phenomena). This doesn't mean I'll discourage belief in the supernatural (indeed, as I want to believe in the supernatural, I don't see anything wrong with teaching children to believe). We'll still have Santa et al., but as a game that we talk about as pretend.
Is it cruel to abstain from teaching our child to believe in Santa? We're not preventing him from fun, gifts, or wonder: we will do everything we can to make Christmas a special and mystical experience for him. Perhaps we're saving him from existential doubt in the future ("If there's no Santa, does that mean there's no God, either?").
At any rate, he doesn't seem to mind. Today I explained to our six-month old that there's no Santa, Easter Bunny, or Tooth Fairy, and he laughed at me. He seemed to take the news very well.
But this is a chance for discussion. My tone through most of this post was intended to be playful satire, not judgmental lecture. What do you think? Are there good reasons for teaching children to believe in mystical creatures we know don't exist? I would like to hear different opinions on why children should or should not grow up believing in Santa.
Are you aware that millions of adults are consistently, repeatedly lying to children? That there is a massive conspiracy among adults to convince kids to believe lies that adults themselves do not believe? This conspiracy of serial dishonesty and deception against our children is largely accepted by the mass media, corporations, consumers, and parents. In fact, many parents are participating in this conspiracy of spreading lies used to manipulate the behavior of children.
If you feel children are not ready to be exposed to the sinister reality of this conspiracy, this is the time to make sure no children are looking at the screen. I am now ready to expose these lies.
There is no Santa Claus.
There is no Easter Bunny.
There is no Tooth Fairy.
No reasonable adult believes in a fat man living at the North Pole with a team of elves and reindeer helping him fly around the world to break into our homes. No reasonable adult believes there are rabbits that lay eggs and bring candy to children. And while some reasonable adults do believe in fairies, I am aware of no reasonable adult that believes in a fairy that pays children for their teeth.
And yet many people considered good parents do tell their children these lies. And if I attempted to tell children the truth about the non-existence of Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy, parents would be incredibly angry at me. Even as we teach our children the virtue of honesty, even as we teach them to tell the truth, parents lie to them about the existence of these beings that parents themselves do not believe in. This isn't a lie of omission either (we don't have to explain the realities of sex to children, and we should probably wait until they are older before allowing them to understand the realities of atrocities like genocide or war); it's a deliberate, active lie.
I don't wish to ask my son to believe in anything that I know not to be true. This doesn't mean his life will not be filled with wonder (the world is full of amazing phenomena). This doesn't mean I'll discourage belief in the supernatural (indeed, as I want to believe in the supernatural, I don't see anything wrong with teaching children to believe). We'll still have Santa et al., but as a game that we talk about as pretend.
Is it cruel to abstain from teaching our child to believe in Santa? We're not preventing him from fun, gifts, or wonder: we will do everything we can to make Christmas a special and mystical experience for him. Perhaps we're saving him from existential doubt in the future ("If there's no Santa, does that mean there's no God, either?").
At any rate, he doesn't seem to mind. Today I explained to our six-month old that there's no Santa, Easter Bunny, or Tooth Fairy, and he laughed at me. He seemed to take the news very well.
But this is a chance for discussion. My tone through most of this post was intended to be playful satire, not judgmental lecture. What do you think? Are there good reasons for teaching children to believe in mystical creatures we know don't exist? I would like to hear different opinions on why children should or should not grow up believing in Santa.
14.7.07
Gender Identity
When my husband and I first got pregnant, we both said we didn't want to know the gender of the baby. Mainly, we wanted the excitement throughout the pregnancy (and even into the delivery room) of not knowing. But another reason we didn't want to find out the sex was to avoid getting all blue or pink clothing and toys as gifts. It is important that children be given wiggle room so that they can decide how to express their personality in a way that suits them. So, we went neutral, painted the room yellow, and registered for things of all colors.
I know I am not the first mother to try and go gender neutral. But I am surprised that people have given me a hard time about it. Not a lot of people, but enough to bother me. When I told a bunch of friends that I planned to continue gender neutral clothing as my child grew, they asked, "How much green and yellow can you handle?" I said we would buy all colors, from red to tan to purple. I was asked, "But what if it's a boy? Boys can't wear purple!" I got irritated and mentioned something about not saying such things around the Vikings, and about my baby being able to wear any color he wanted. One woman shut me up with the condescending, "When you actually have a boy, you will understand."
I really hate when people who disagree with me blame it on my lack of experience, as though the only way I could have a different opinion would be out of ignorance. So, I made a personal vow to stay gender neutral. And it lasted--all the way through the newborn sized clothes. Now that my son is 6 months, he is on his third set of clothes. Granted, I did not purchase any of the clothes myself, because we have been lucky enough to have gotten lots of hand-me-downs and gifts. But even if I had, it is hard to find things that don't either come with ruffles or little sayings like, "Daddy's favorite little quarterback." Don't get me wrong: ruffles and quarterbacks are cute, but it's frustrated to have such limited choices. So, probably half of the time I dress him in blue.
Why do I do this? Have I already abandoned my moral stance on forcing gender roles on infants? I like to think not. My son has light skin, blond hair, and bright blue eyes. The truth is, he looks amazing in blue. However, it is important to me to maintain an openness about gender identity in the house. I suppose I can continue to try to find other colors I like on him as much as blue (red is also a good match, but there aren't as many red clothes out there, and since I rely on others to provide the wardrobe, I have to take what I can get). I can also consider the fact that gender identity is shaped by much more than the color of his outfits; toys, games, books, and even the adjectives I use to describe him will all make an impact as well. I can make a choice to call him my gentle, sweet little boy rather than my strong, big boy.
In the meantime, I will make an effort to dress him in more 'feminine' colors when I know I will be seeing the people who gave me a hard time, just to make a statement.
I know I am not the first mother to try and go gender neutral. But I am surprised that people have given me a hard time about it. Not a lot of people, but enough to bother me. When I told a bunch of friends that I planned to continue gender neutral clothing as my child grew, they asked, "How much green and yellow can you handle?" I said we would buy all colors, from red to tan to purple. I was asked, "But what if it's a boy? Boys can't wear purple!" I got irritated and mentioned something about not saying such things around the Vikings, and about my baby being able to wear any color he wanted. One woman shut me up with the condescending, "When you actually have a boy, you will understand."
I really hate when people who disagree with me blame it on my lack of experience, as though the only way I could have a different opinion would be out of ignorance. So, I made a personal vow to stay gender neutral. And it lasted--all the way through the newborn sized clothes. Now that my son is 6 months, he is on his third set of clothes. Granted, I did not purchase any of the clothes myself, because we have been lucky enough to have gotten lots of hand-me-downs and gifts. But even if I had, it is hard to find things that don't either come with ruffles or little sayings like, "Daddy's favorite little quarterback." Don't get me wrong: ruffles and quarterbacks are cute, but it's frustrated to have such limited choices. So, probably half of the time I dress him in blue.
Why do I do this? Have I already abandoned my moral stance on forcing gender roles on infants? I like to think not. My son has light skin, blond hair, and bright blue eyes. The truth is, he looks amazing in blue. However, it is important to me to maintain an openness about gender identity in the house. I suppose I can continue to try to find other colors I like on him as much as blue (red is also a good match, but there aren't as many red clothes out there, and since I rely on others to provide the wardrobe, I have to take what I can get). I can also consider the fact that gender identity is shaped by much more than the color of his outfits; toys, games, books, and even the adjectives I use to describe him will all make an impact as well. I can make a choice to call him my gentle, sweet little boy rather than my strong, big boy.
In the meantime, I will make an effort to dress him in more 'feminine' colors when I know I will be seeing the people who gave me a hard time, just to make a statement.
Eating Solids
This week we began feeding our baby cereal. There are good and bad side effects of Fox eating more than just milk.
The Goods:
-It's cute to watch him get all covered with sticky food stuffs
-He seems to enjoy biting on the rubber tip of his spoons
-It makes me proud to see him acting more and more like a little person
-Supposedly, this will help him sleep longer/better during the night
The Bads:
-It's messy
-The process of cleaning up after the meal takes around 20 minutes
-This will lead to peas, carrots, bananas, and other nonsense
-Poop will start to smell like poop before long
-I have to mix the cereal with breastmilk, which means extra pumping (blah)
-It's proof he is growing up, and I explicitly told him he wasn't supposed to do that. He is breaking rules.
The Goods:
-It's cute to watch him get all covered with sticky food stuffs
-He seems to enjoy biting on the rubber tip of his spoons
-It makes me proud to see him acting more and more like a little person
-Supposedly, this will help him sleep longer/better during the night
The Bads:
-It's messy
-The process of cleaning up after the meal takes around 20 minutes
-This will lead to peas, carrots, bananas, and other nonsense
-Poop will start to smell like poop before long
-I have to mix the cereal with breastmilk, which means extra pumping (blah)
-It's proof he is growing up, and I explicitly told him he wasn't supposed to do that. He is breaking rules.
9.7.07
More Advice, Please
Lately, my husband and I have been having some trouble with our son. He's almost 6 months old, and he has mastered rolling over from back to tummy. He can't roll from tummy to back (which is supposed to be easier); I don't mind, because he's an individual. That's cool. But the past couple weeks, we haven't been able to let him sleep in the crib. He gets himself onto his tummy and can't roll back over.
The concern isn't so much the SIDS risk (although I still worry about that all the time). Experts say once they are strong enough to roll over, they are pretty much not a SIDS risk anymore. The real issue is that after he rolls, he always manages to get an arm, a leg, or both stuck through the bars of his crib, and then he cries like a maniac. I don't know if it hurts him or if he is just scared or what. But there is no helping it.
In order to avoid this terrible fiasco, we have been having the baby sleep in his car seat--a method we used when his crib was still too big for him to feel comfortable in. But I really like him sleeping in his crib, where he belongs. It is true that in the car seat he sleeps much longer and much more soundly than the crib (even more than he did before the rolling/stuck leg phase hit).
I don't know what to do: should I continue to let him sleep in the car seat, at least until he figures out how to roll back over from tummy to back? Or should I just be tough and push through the crying and rolling and getting stuck?
Also, does anyone have experience with the whole 'putting baby down to sleep while he is awake and letting him cry it out' philosophy? We have been doing that for the past few months, and he still cries a lot each night (unless he falls asleep while eating). So, I don't know if I should keep trying it, or if I should just give up. He cries for as little as five minutes and as long as an hour. I feel like he is learning to self-soothe, because I see him finding his thumb and calming down in other situations. But he still does cry a lot at night, so I don't know for sure. Any input will really help us. Thanks!
The concern isn't so much the SIDS risk (although I still worry about that all the time). Experts say once they are strong enough to roll over, they are pretty much not a SIDS risk anymore. The real issue is that after he rolls, he always manages to get an arm, a leg, or both stuck through the bars of his crib, and then he cries like a maniac. I don't know if it hurts him or if he is just scared or what. But there is no helping it.
In order to avoid this terrible fiasco, we have been having the baby sleep in his car seat--a method we used when his crib was still too big for him to feel comfortable in. But I really like him sleeping in his crib, where he belongs. It is true that in the car seat he sleeps much longer and much more soundly than the crib (even more than he did before the rolling/stuck leg phase hit).
I don't know what to do: should I continue to let him sleep in the car seat, at least until he figures out how to roll back over from tummy to back? Or should I just be tough and push through the crying and rolling and getting stuck?
Also, does anyone have experience with the whole 'putting baby down to sleep while he is awake and letting him cry it out' philosophy? We have been doing that for the past few months, and he still cries a lot each night (unless he falls asleep while eating). So, I don't know if I should keep trying it, or if I should just give up. He cries for as little as five minutes and as long as an hour. I feel like he is learning to self-soothe, because I see him finding his thumb and calming down in other situations. But he still does cry a lot at night, so I don't know for sure. Any input will really help us. Thanks!
5.7.07
Picture Perfect
I need advice from as many people (parents or not) as possible to help me make an important decision. Yesterday, at the 4th of July parade, a politician came over to talk to us (thanks again, Abe). While there, he picked up my baby and I took a picture. We had a good chuckle together, and then he asked me to email him the photo. I promised him I would.
Today, I was about to send him to picture, but I googled him first to learn more about him. I was not very happy with what I found out. I am sure he is a great guy, but he's a republican. Which isn't such an issue--almost half of politicians in America are. I looked through his info, and he seems to be a supporter of the environment. So, that's good.
However, he is also on the Game, Fish, and Forestry Division committee, which I assume means he is a supporter of hunting and fishing (and that may be a faulty assumption, but who knows). But the biggest thing for me was that he voted against the smoking ban. Who would vote against the smoking ban? Are you kidding me? Seriously. The health of future generations depends on it--not only are kids not exposed to secondhand smoke in public, but they also aren't seeing adults everywhere they go lighting up.
So, now I am faced with a dilemma. Should I keep my promise and send the picture of the politician with my baby? Or should I just forget it? It isn't that the guy is bad or that anyone who has his views is bad, but since I don't support much of what he stands for, I would hate to see the picture used to further his political agenda. I mean, I doubt he just wanted the picture to put in a frame at his house. It must be for the whole baby-kissing image politicians love.
So, should I exploit my baby/beliefs or become a promise-breaker?
Today, I was about to send him to picture, but I googled him first to learn more about him. I was not very happy with what I found out. I am sure he is a great guy, but he's a republican. Which isn't such an issue--almost half of politicians in America are. I looked through his info, and he seems to be a supporter of the environment. So, that's good.
However, he is also on the Game, Fish, and Forestry Division committee, which I assume means he is a supporter of hunting and fishing (and that may be a faulty assumption, but who knows). But the biggest thing for me was that he voted against the smoking ban. Who would vote against the smoking ban? Are you kidding me? Seriously. The health of future generations depends on it--not only are kids not exposed to secondhand smoke in public, but they also aren't seeing adults everywhere they go lighting up.
So, now I am faced with a dilemma. Should I keep my promise and send the picture of the politician with my baby? Or should I just forget it? It isn't that the guy is bad or that anyone who has his views is bad, but since I don't support much of what he stands for, I would hate to see the picture used to further his political agenda. I mean, I doubt he just wanted the picture to put in a frame at his house. It must be for the whole baby-kissing image politicians love.
So, should I exploit my baby/beliefs or become a promise-breaker?
28.6.07
Octogenarian Strangers Know Best
(This is a guest post by Pacifist Viking, Cruelty-Free Mommy's husband and Fox's father. Occasionally I'll chime in with a guest post).
Let's set some context for this tale of woe and horror. I haven't been a parent very long, and I know it; there's a lot I don't know. When my experienced family and friends tell me things about babies and/or parenting, I listen, because I know that they know things I don't know and should know. I'm not arrogant and I'm not resistent to parenting advice.
Today, a mild day with a very light and occasional breeze, I took Fox on a walk. When we go on walks (which is frequent), he is covered from the back, both sides, and the top. We make sure he is comfortable, not too hot or cold, and we protect his skin and eyes from the sun.
I walked past an old woman sweeping leaves. She started asking about my baby, so I stopped to show him to her.
"Don't let him get wind in his ears. He'll get an ear ache," she said.
"That's what I always told my kids. Don't let a baby get wind in his ears, because he can't tell you it hurts," she said. "He'll just pull on his ear."
"If you were my little baby, I'd have a hat on you when I took you out," she said.
"I just hate to see babies get ear aches, because they can't tell you it hurts," she said.
She actually said all of these things. At first, I thought she was just being chatty. By the end, I think it was obvious she was being judgmental. I suspect she probably called her friends to talk about the horrible parent walking his son around on a 70 degree summer day with no hat to cover his ears.
I really don't know whether it is true that babies get ear aches if they are exposed to wind (it's possible, but it sounds like an old myth. At any rate, Fox was burrowed pretty deep in his infant stroller, and could hardly be considered exposed to any strong wind). I do know that babies often spend time outside. We spend a lot of time outside with Fox, usually on walks, and he rarely acts fussy afterward (actually, our son is incredibly mild mannered and usually quite happy and smily. He is rarely fussy as long as he is getting some sort of attention). I also know that knowledge of babies changes very quickly: when I was a baby parents were taught to put their babies to sleep on their stomachs, and today parents are taught to put their babies to sleep on their backs.
The point is, as a young parent that is completely unknown to this old woman, I don't need her judgment. Her homespun advice about wind and ear aches might be helpful; her passive aggressive insults are not. There is a great deal of useful information about childrens' health easily available to young parents today (from the hospital, books, magazines, the internet, friends with children, our own parents, etc.). I'll happily listen to her advice, but when I'm taking my child out for a pleasant, peaceful, healthy walk on a beautiful summer day, I really don't need her judgmental tone disapproving of my child's exposure to wind.
At what point are strangers out of line to vocally cast their judgment on parents? And how should parents respond to these judgments?
Let's set some context for this tale of woe and horror. I haven't been a parent very long, and I know it; there's a lot I don't know. When my experienced family and friends tell me things about babies and/or parenting, I listen, because I know that they know things I don't know and should know. I'm not arrogant and I'm not resistent to parenting advice.
Today, a mild day with a very light and occasional breeze, I took Fox on a walk. When we go on walks (which is frequent), he is covered from the back, both sides, and the top. We make sure he is comfortable, not too hot or cold, and we protect his skin and eyes from the sun.
I walked past an old woman sweeping leaves. She started asking about my baby, so I stopped to show him to her.
"Don't let him get wind in his ears. He'll get an ear ache," she said.
"That's what I always told my kids. Don't let a baby get wind in his ears, because he can't tell you it hurts," she said. "He'll just pull on his ear."
"If you were my little baby, I'd have a hat on you when I took you out," she said.
"I just hate to see babies get ear aches, because they can't tell you it hurts," she said.
She actually said all of these things. At first, I thought she was just being chatty. By the end, I think it was obvious she was being judgmental. I suspect she probably called her friends to talk about the horrible parent walking his son around on a 70 degree summer day with no hat to cover his ears.
I really don't know whether it is true that babies get ear aches if they are exposed to wind (it's possible, but it sounds like an old myth. At any rate, Fox was burrowed pretty deep in his infant stroller, and could hardly be considered exposed to any strong wind). I do know that babies often spend time outside. We spend a lot of time outside with Fox, usually on walks, and he rarely acts fussy afterward (actually, our son is incredibly mild mannered and usually quite happy and smily. He is rarely fussy as long as he is getting some sort of attention). I also know that knowledge of babies changes very quickly: when I was a baby parents were taught to put their babies to sleep on their stomachs, and today parents are taught to put their babies to sleep on their backs.
The point is, as a young parent that is completely unknown to this old woman, I don't need her judgment. Her homespun advice about wind and ear aches might be helpful; her passive aggressive insults are not. There is a great deal of useful information about childrens' health easily available to young parents today (from the hospital, books, magazines, the internet, friends with children, our own parents, etc.). I'll happily listen to her advice, but when I'm taking my child out for a pleasant, peaceful, healthy walk on a beautiful summer day, I really don't need her judgmental tone disapproving of my child's exposure to wind.
At what point are strangers out of line to vocally cast their judgment on parents? And how should parents respond to these judgments?
24.6.07
Starting Young
Habits are hard to break. Ask any smoker. Because of this, it is really important to start parenting a baby the same way you would like to parent a toddler, a child, a teen, etc. I have big dreams for my son, so I am trying to lay the foundation now, while he is too young to really understand anything, so that the habits I develop as a parent are good ones, and I don't struggle to 'become' a good parent when my child is older.
One quality I hope he possesses is tolerance and understanding of all people. In order to foster this, I hope to expose him to a variety to people, cultures, and lifestyles so that he never thinks of people as weird or different. When my husband and I were discussing where to buy a house, we purposely chose an ethnically diverse neighborhood (in the best part of the best city EVER!). We really love it there, and we feel better knowing our boy will not grow up amidst a flock of other white protestants. This weekend, we took him to the 2007 Pride Festival at Loring Park. He slept the whole time, so he really didn't get any exposure to the GLBT community, but he was there. Hopefully, he will be there next year too, and the year after, and so on. My goal is to get myself in the habit, so that I don't decide when he is 16 that he really should spend some time getting to know about GLBT issues, and then have it backfire when I take him to the 2023 Pride Festival, and he makes some rude comment to a someone based on prejudices he learned from other kids.
Another thing I want to avoid is obesity. So many kids struggle with this, and although often it is genetic, it isn't always. And who can blame a kid for watching TV and eating Big Macs all day if his parents say it's okay? I would. TV and Big Macs are pretty sweet. Anyway, to help get myself in shape to keep my son in shape, we are doing a couple of things. First, we go for family walks daily. It isn't much in the way of a workout, but it is something. He will learn that it is normal for families to get out and move every day. Second, he isn't allowed to watch TV. What does a 5 month old need to watch TV for? I know if I let myself let him get in the habit, even if it is 15 or 20 minutes here or there so I can sweep the floor or whatever, it will be impossible (or at least really difficult) to stop. So I plan to just not start. When he is older (3 or 4), I will probably allow him to watch a half hour a day. Movies (as a family) don't count! But nothing until he is older.
The other thing we are doing to help us avoid obesity is raising him as a vegetarian (it has many other benefits, too, which I will discuss in detail in future posts). My kid is still just eating breast milk, so it isn't like his vegetarianism is an issue yet, but I am sure it will be some day. Sine my husband and I are both vegetarians, it is an easy choice to make. When he is older, he can make the choice himself about whether he wishes to remain a vegetarian or not (my guess is he will). But not until he is old enough to understand what meat is, what it does to hurt our bodies, and what happens to the animals on their journey to his plate. Regardless of a parent's views on meat consumption, it is fact (not opinion) that most meats are highly fatty and bad for the human body. So, as a way to help avoid childhood obesity, vegetarianism just makes sense.
These are some choices my husband and I have made for our child. Does anyone have any other good ideas of things we can start doing now to help us be good parents later?
One quality I hope he possesses is tolerance and understanding of all people. In order to foster this, I hope to expose him to a variety to people, cultures, and lifestyles so that he never thinks of people as weird or different. When my husband and I were discussing where to buy a house, we purposely chose an ethnically diverse neighborhood (in the best part of the best city EVER!). We really love it there, and we feel better knowing our boy will not grow up amidst a flock of other white protestants. This weekend, we took him to the 2007 Pride Festival at Loring Park. He slept the whole time, so he really didn't get any exposure to the GLBT community, but he was there. Hopefully, he will be there next year too, and the year after, and so on. My goal is to get myself in the habit, so that I don't decide when he is 16 that he really should spend some time getting to know about GLBT issues, and then have it backfire when I take him to the 2023 Pride Festival, and he makes some rude comment to a someone based on prejudices he learned from other kids.
Another thing I want to avoid is obesity. So many kids struggle with this, and although often it is genetic, it isn't always. And who can blame a kid for watching TV and eating Big Macs all day if his parents say it's okay? I would. TV and Big Macs are pretty sweet. Anyway, to help get myself in shape to keep my son in shape, we are doing a couple of things. First, we go for family walks daily. It isn't much in the way of a workout, but it is something. He will learn that it is normal for families to get out and move every day. Second, he isn't allowed to watch TV. What does a 5 month old need to watch TV for? I know if I let myself let him get in the habit, even if it is 15 or 20 minutes here or there so I can sweep the floor or whatever, it will be impossible (or at least really difficult) to stop. So I plan to just not start. When he is older (3 or 4), I will probably allow him to watch a half hour a day. Movies (as a family) don't count! But nothing until he is older.
The other thing we are doing to help us avoid obesity is raising him as a vegetarian (it has many other benefits, too, which I will discuss in detail in future posts). My kid is still just eating breast milk, so it isn't like his vegetarianism is an issue yet, but I am sure it will be some day. Sine my husband and I are both vegetarians, it is an easy choice to make. When he is older, he can make the choice himself about whether he wishes to remain a vegetarian or not (my guess is he will). But not until he is old enough to understand what meat is, what it does to hurt our bodies, and what happens to the animals on their journey to his plate. Regardless of a parent's views on meat consumption, it is fact (not opinion) that most meats are highly fatty and bad for the human body. So, as a way to help avoid childhood obesity, vegetarianism just makes sense.
These are some choices my husband and I have made for our child. Does anyone have any other good ideas of things we can start doing now to help us be good parents later?
22.6.07
In Defense of Breastfeeding
I am not going to spend too much time on this topic, because I feel like it has been discussed over and over by many experts. I only have a few new things to add to the dialogue.
I have yet to meet a person who thinks breastfeeding is bad. I think it is mostly agreed upon that if people can and want to, they should do it. I don't need to cite the benefits--you can read about them on your own if you are unaware. What I would like to talk about is the shame, guilt, and stigma associated with breastfeeding and what I think needs to happen to make this supposedly wonderful process actually wonderful.
I have been pretty lucky in my ability to breastfeed. I have had a few problems, but mostly things are going smoothly. I haven't faced much discrimination about my choice, either. But I know I am a minority in this, and that most women have many horror stories to share. My experiences are pretty tame, but I think they provide some insight.
The majority of mothers will tell you that their bodies are no longer their own. We are not the sleek, sexy, pure, holy figures you see on the pages of magazines. We are beds, shields, Kleenexes, incubators, and toys. I no longer consider my breasts sexual objects (maybe someday that will return). However, I know that most people, especially strangers who don't know I am nursing, would still consider them that way. I am not saying the whole world thinks I'm sexy, I just mean boobs are boobs. The other night, I went to a club for a friend's bachelorette party. By the end of the night, my right side had grown well past a D cup, while my left side held strong at a B/C. I stuck close to my friends and tried to not expose myself more than I had to, but still I got strange looks from lots of men. What could I say? Should I have to make excuses for my misshapen chest? Who gives them the right to look at and judge my body, anyway? Just because I am in a club doesn't mean I want to be objectified. The only male my body is meant to please now is my son.
In the same vein, I have some trouble with my appearance at work. I teach high school, and I try to dress professionally (or at least not sexy). But since my chest changes size during the day, it is hard to anticipate how a shirt will fit by 2:30 when I get dressed at 6:30. Some things look fine, but end up pretty tight in the chest or more low-cut than I would have thought. I have had minimal trouble with leaking during the day, but I still wear pads just in case. Sometimes, if I am having a particularly productive (milk-wise) day, you can see the little circles of the pads through my shirt. What to do? Again, should I have to feel ashamed and apologetic for the natural side effects of what most would consider to be a good and selfless choice? Fortunately, nobody at work has complained, but I am blessed to work at an enlightened school.
Since I work full time, I have to pump twice daily at work in order to remain comfortable and produce enough milk for my son. At my school, all teachers have keys to one another's rooms. So, in addition to wearing a nursing cover and locking my door, I have to post signs warning people not to come in. Still, in the 11 weeks I worked before summer break came, I was walked in on by the man who does our tech support once and on another unfortunate instance, the man who teaches phys ed, who was accompanied by two sixth grade boys. What else can I do? It didn't so much embarrass me, but I know they all felt horribly humiliated. I spent a long time feeling ashamed and apologetic (though I laughed it off to make everyone feel OK about it). I would like to just put a sign up that says, "I am pumping breast milk--I need privacy," but then I would feel bad exposing the high schoolers to the idea of breasts (mine, nonetheless). Should I have to feel bad about pumping at work, or about being open about it with people under the age of 18? Probably not. But that's the way it is in our society.
These are some of the issues I have had with breastfeeding (or at least the ones I am willing to share here in detail). I have had situations where I needed to feed my baby and I had to do it in front of others. I felt like some kind of leper. People stopped noticing me and talking to me, and it took a while to recover, even once I was done. Now, why do people have issues with breastfeeder? My theory is that only a few people have issues with it. Those people are probably just uncomfortable with nudity. And most of us hide under blankets rather than just whip out nipples, but the very idea that there is a nipple there freaks them out. I can't blame people for that. I do have a sub-theory that men in particular hate to see it, because it forces them to see breasts as something other than sexual, despite the fact that the only reason they are attracted to breasts in the first place is because of leftover feelings of comfort and affection from when they were breastfed as babies. Chicken/Omelet.
Other than those few people, I really think most people don't have issues with breastfeeding mothers. I am a big advocate of public breastfeeding (despite the fact that I rarely do it), but I still am not sure what to do when I encounter other mothers doing it. Usually I look out of interest, or even solidarity, until I am caught. Then, I look away awkwardly. These poor women probably assume I am judging them. So, people like me are probably being added to the pile of disapproving onlookers. The numbers are probably skewed. A bunch of the people who supposedly are against public breastfeeding are really just curious.
The group of people with issues against public breastfeeding is probably fewer than many think. However, this is a big issue for those of us who are making this choice. We need some changes. Here are my suggestions:
1. If you have a problem with public breastfeeding, try not to be offended by it. We do it because we are trying to make the best choice we can for our children. It isn't about you. We are not trying to bother you. You don't have to look if you don't want to. Please try not to make us feel uncomfortable, because chances are, we are much more sensitive about the issue than you are.
2. If you are a breastfeeding woman, stay strong. Do what you think is best for you and your kid, but don't be purposely in the faces of bystanders.
3. If you are a business owner/manager, set up a comfortable place for us to nurse. Some places have nice family rest-rooms with lounges for nursing. Others expect us to use our cars or a bathroom stall. I would rather sit down in the middle of a store and feed my son than take him into a disgusting bathroom stall and feed him. Nobody would expect a man to eat a hot dog at the urinal. I will not allow my baby to eat his food on a public toilet.
4. If you are a member of modern American society, get over your image of women. We are more than sexual objects. We are not lesser people, whether or not we have kids. Our opinions matter, our needs matter, and we are important. Does anyone really think breastfeeding would be an issue if men were the ones who did it? There would be nursing rooms in every store and laws to protect the rights of nursing dads. Prove me wrong. Women need to be given respect, and motherhood and nursing need to be given honor, freedom and acceptance.
I have yet to meet a person who thinks breastfeeding is bad. I think it is mostly agreed upon that if people can and want to, they should do it. I don't need to cite the benefits--you can read about them on your own if you are unaware. What I would like to talk about is the shame, guilt, and stigma associated with breastfeeding and what I think needs to happen to make this supposedly wonderful process actually wonderful.
I have been pretty lucky in my ability to breastfeed. I have had a few problems, but mostly things are going smoothly. I haven't faced much discrimination about my choice, either. But I know I am a minority in this, and that most women have many horror stories to share. My experiences are pretty tame, but I think they provide some insight.
The majority of mothers will tell you that their bodies are no longer their own. We are not the sleek, sexy, pure, holy figures you see on the pages of magazines. We are beds, shields, Kleenexes, incubators, and toys. I no longer consider my breasts sexual objects (maybe someday that will return). However, I know that most people, especially strangers who don't know I am nursing, would still consider them that way. I am not saying the whole world thinks I'm sexy, I just mean boobs are boobs. The other night, I went to a club for a friend's bachelorette party. By the end of the night, my right side had grown well past a D cup, while my left side held strong at a B/C. I stuck close to my friends and tried to not expose myself more than I had to, but still I got strange looks from lots of men. What could I say? Should I have to make excuses for my misshapen chest? Who gives them the right to look at and judge my body, anyway? Just because I am in a club doesn't mean I want to be objectified. The only male my body is meant to please now is my son.
In the same vein, I have some trouble with my appearance at work. I teach high school, and I try to dress professionally (or at least not sexy). But since my chest changes size during the day, it is hard to anticipate how a shirt will fit by 2:30 when I get dressed at 6:30. Some things look fine, but end up pretty tight in the chest or more low-cut than I would have thought. I have had minimal trouble with leaking during the day, but I still wear pads just in case. Sometimes, if I am having a particularly productive (milk-wise) day, you can see the little circles of the pads through my shirt. What to do? Again, should I have to feel ashamed and apologetic for the natural side effects of what most would consider to be a good and selfless choice? Fortunately, nobody at work has complained, but I am blessed to work at an enlightened school.
Since I work full time, I have to pump twice daily at work in order to remain comfortable and produce enough milk for my son. At my school, all teachers have keys to one another's rooms. So, in addition to wearing a nursing cover and locking my door, I have to post signs warning people not to come in. Still, in the 11 weeks I worked before summer break came, I was walked in on by the man who does our tech support once and on another unfortunate instance, the man who teaches phys ed, who was accompanied by two sixth grade boys. What else can I do? It didn't so much embarrass me, but I know they all felt horribly humiliated. I spent a long time feeling ashamed and apologetic (though I laughed it off to make everyone feel OK about it). I would like to just put a sign up that says, "I am pumping breast milk--I need privacy," but then I would feel bad exposing the high schoolers to the idea of breasts (mine, nonetheless). Should I have to feel bad about pumping at work, or about being open about it with people under the age of 18? Probably not. But that's the way it is in our society.
These are some of the issues I have had with breastfeeding (or at least the ones I am willing to share here in detail). I have had situations where I needed to feed my baby and I had to do it in front of others. I felt like some kind of leper. People stopped noticing me and talking to me, and it took a while to recover, even once I was done. Now, why do people have issues with breastfeeder? My theory is that only a few people have issues with it. Those people are probably just uncomfortable with nudity. And most of us hide under blankets rather than just whip out nipples, but the very idea that there is a nipple there freaks them out. I can't blame people for that. I do have a sub-theory that men in particular hate to see it, because it forces them to see breasts as something other than sexual, despite the fact that the only reason they are attracted to breasts in the first place is because of leftover feelings of comfort and affection from when they were breastfed as babies. Chicken/Omelet.
Other than those few people, I really think most people don't have issues with breastfeeding mothers. I am a big advocate of public breastfeeding (despite the fact that I rarely do it), but I still am not sure what to do when I encounter other mothers doing it. Usually I look out of interest, or even solidarity, until I am caught. Then, I look away awkwardly. These poor women probably assume I am judging them. So, people like me are probably being added to the pile of disapproving onlookers. The numbers are probably skewed. A bunch of the people who supposedly are against public breastfeeding are really just curious.
The group of people with issues against public breastfeeding is probably fewer than many think. However, this is a big issue for those of us who are making this choice. We need some changes. Here are my suggestions:
1. If you have a problem with public breastfeeding, try not to be offended by it. We do it because we are trying to make the best choice we can for our children. It isn't about you. We are not trying to bother you. You don't have to look if you don't want to. Please try not to make us feel uncomfortable, because chances are, we are much more sensitive about the issue than you are.
2. If you are a breastfeeding woman, stay strong. Do what you think is best for you and your kid, but don't be purposely in the faces of bystanders.
3. If you are a business owner/manager, set up a comfortable place for us to nurse. Some places have nice family rest-rooms with lounges for nursing. Others expect us to use our cars or a bathroom stall. I would rather sit down in the middle of a store and feed my son than take him into a disgusting bathroom stall and feed him. Nobody would expect a man to eat a hot dog at the urinal. I will not allow my baby to eat his food on a public toilet.
4. If you are a member of modern American society, get over your image of women. We are more than sexual objects. We are not lesser people, whether or not we have kids. Our opinions matter, our needs matter, and we are important. Does anyone really think breastfeeding would be an issue if men were the ones who did it? There would be nursing rooms in every store and laws to protect the rights of nursing dads. Prove me wrong. Women need to be given respect, and motherhood and nursing need to be given honor, freedom and acceptance.
20.6.07
Sexualizing Young Girls
Something that really bothers me is the rampant sexualization of young girls that I see everywhere I look. Ok, maybe that is a slight bit hyperbolic. Regardless, sexuality is being forced upon girls at younger and younger ages. Men are attracted to the image of the young girl. This lead to all sorts of problems in our society.
Many people would blame Britney and her school-girl outfits. Maybe she's at fault; maybe she's a victim herself. In truth, I am not old enough to have been able to track the progression of this phenomenon myself, so I won't point fingers at who started it. I will, however, point fingers at some of those who help advance it.
Why should a girl have her ears pierced before she's old enough to want it done? I have seen many baby girls with pierced ears. Just this past weekend at that Maplewood Mall, I walked past a two-ish(?) -year-old girl screaming bloody murder as her mother held her down to get her ears pierced. I didn't know who to feel worse for--the little girl, or the poor Piercing Pagoda employee, who had the unfortunate job of traumatizing the kid. Why would a reasonable parent do this? It doesn't make sense to me. It seems so irresponsible. The only reason I can see for having earrings on a young girl is to make her look like a tiny woman. A little girl isn't a tiny woman--she's a little girl. It isn't "cute," it is a way of forcing an image of sexually maturity onto an innocent child.
Okay, next: trashy clothes. So many of the clothes marketed for teens, preteens, and young children are sexy. For example, at Target.com you can see the Toddler Girls Cherokee Cap Sleeve Dot Baby Doll Top or Girls' Genuine Kids from Oshkosh Smocked Tunic. At Walmart.com, you can see the Faded Glory Little Girls' Embroidered Halter Top. All these shirts are labeled as "toddler," "girl," or "little girl." They are all super-cute, but there is an inherent sexiness to them. There shouldn't be toddler shirts that make me say, "I wonder if they have that in my size..." But as unsuitable as these (and many other) tops are, they are nothing compared to swimwear. Why do bikinis for little girls even exist? They are impractical and overly-revealing. Convince me that there aren't men (or at least teen boys) who wouldn't ogle the swimsuit and body before looking up to the face to notice the gap-toothed smile of a five-year-old child. It's disgusting.
Now, here is what makes me REALLY upset about all this: American Baby Magazine, an organization that should know better, featured a disturbing picture on the cover of their June issue. I tried to find the pic online to link here, but I couldn't. And I don't really want to expose the poor child more than she already has been. But the picture is of a girl with her hair curled, wearing excessive amounts of blush, mascara, and lip gloss, and a tiny triangle-topped bikini. I guessed that she was no older than five. But when I opened the magazine, a blurb on the inside of the cover explained that the girl is actually 1 1/2. Wow. I don't see any possible chance that the girl does not have a feeling of being sexy, being appealing, even if she doesn't have the right words to label her feelings. Shame on her parents, and shame on American Baby Magazine.
So, parents out there: I beg you, do not dress your little girls like little women. Keep them safe and innocent as long as possible. There are plenty of chances for them to be sexy once they are grown. And imagine how much more difficult it will be to train your daughter to make moral and safe choices once her hormones are going crazy if you have been laying the groundwork for promiscuity for years.
Many people would blame Britney and her school-girl outfits. Maybe she's at fault; maybe she's a victim herself. In truth, I am not old enough to have been able to track the progression of this phenomenon myself, so I won't point fingers at who started it. I will, however, point fingers at some of those who help advance it.
Why should a girl have her ears pierced before she's old enough to want it done? I have seen many baby girls with pierced ears. Just this past weekend at that Maplewood Mall, I walked past a two-ish(?) -year-old girl screaming bloody murder as her mother held her down to get her ears pierced. I didn't know who to feel worse for--the little girl, or the poor Piercing Pagoda employee, who had the unfortunate job of traumatizing the kid. Why would a reasonable parent do this? It doesn't make sense to me. It seems so irresponsible. The only reason I can see for having earrings on a young girl is to make her look like a tiny woman. A little girl isn't a tiny woman--she's a little girl. It isn't "cute," it is a way of forcing an image of sexually maturity onto an innocent child.
Okay, next: trashy clothes. So many of the clothes marketed for teens, preteens, and young children are sexy. For example, at Target.com you can see the Toddler Girls Cherokee Cap Sleeve Dot Baby Doll Top or Girls' Genuine Kids from Oshkosh Smocked Tunic. At Walmart.com, you can see the Faded Glory Little Girls' Embroidered Halter Top. All these shirts are labeled as "toddler," "girl," or "little girl." They are all super-cute, but there is an inherent sexiness to them. There shouldn't be toddler shirts that make me say, "I wonder if they have that in my size..." But as unsuitable as these (and many other) tops are, they are nothing compared to swimwear. Why do bikinis for little girls even exist? They are impractical and overly-revealing. Convince me that there aren't men (or at least teen boys) who wouldn't ogle the swimsuit and body before looking up to the face to notice the gap-toothed smile of a five-year-old child. It's disgusting.
Now, here is what makes me REALLY upset about all this: American Baby Magazine, an organization that should know better, featured a disturbing picture on the cover of their June issue. I tried to find the pic online to link here, but I couldn't. And I don't really want to expose the poor child more than she already has been. But the picture is of a girl with her hair curled, wearing excessive amounts of blush, mascara, and lip gloss, and a tiny triangle-topped bikini. I guessed that she was no older than five. But when I opened the magazine, a blurb on the inside of the cover explained that the girl is actually 1 1/2. Wow. I don't see any possible chance that the girl does not have a feeling of being sexy, being appealing, even if she doesn't have the right words to label her feelings. Shame on her parents, and shame on American Baby Magazine.
So, parents out there: I beg you, do not dress your little girls like little women. Keep them safe and innocent as long as possible. There are plenty of chances for them to be sexy once they are grown. And imagine how much more difficult it will be to train your daughter to make moral and safe choices once her hormones are going crazy if you have been laying the groundwork for promiscuity for years.
The Mission
Welcome to Cruelty-Free Mommy! I have been considering starting a parenting blog for quite a while, and I finally decided to get on with it. My mission with this blog is to have a place for myself and others to share ideas, concerns, complaints, and advice about parenting and related issues. Anyone who has seen "We Have Mixed Feelings About Sven Sundgaard" knows I am frugal, so this will also be a venue for sharing tips about keeping family life affordable in the Twin Cities. Feel free to bring up any topics of interest, and I'll most likely be happy to dialogue about them. Thanks for visiting and come back often!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)