Barbie Makeover! Barbie Makeover!

April 26th, 2007

Maybe it’s the fact that living with two males in a small space was starting to make me feel outnumbered. Maybe it was nostalgia. Maybe it was because she was only $6.00 and I had some time to kill at the CVS.

But however it happened, let’s all welcome my co-blogger, City Style(tm) Barbie!

bb1.jpg

OMG, ya’ll! Hi!

Listen, I just wanted to talk about some of my problems. I mean, besides having to compete with those Bratz bitches.

First, there’s my hair. I’ve got that weird pulled-back bangs thing happening, and it was put on me at the factory, so now I have permanent hair-dent.

hair.jpg

Yuck, right? Plus I have this weird spiky haircut thing, that is all Jennifer Aniston circa 2003, and whatever…how are little girls supposed to make me a princess or whatever with this hair? You can’t even comb it.

Speaking of dated…my halter top’s ok, but these pants are fugly.
pants.jpg

I mean, when MY tiny vinyl calfs look chunky in them, why would any real woman wear these? Ick.

And this came as a shock to emjaybee, because she’s old, and apparently, her Barbies that she played with in 1928 and were probably made out of wood or something did NOT have underwear growing out of their skin:

waist.jpg

Maybe this is some kind of sex thing…I mean, it’s not like those old wooden Barbies had lady parts, but apparently that was still too racy for people who WORRY about DOLL GENITALS, and you know, ok guys. Whatev, I’ll wear your stupid skinderwear. But I’d probably like it not to peek out of my clothes, cause gross.

And then, there’s the worst, my SHOES. Oh my GOD ya’ll…I mean, WTF?

shoes.jpg

I mean, I have built-in high heel-shaped FEET, and they STILL won’t stay on. Even fetish pumps come with STRAPS, moron Barbie-dressers!

So yeah. She’s going to have to buy me some new clothes, and maybe cut my hair. Because it’s no fun to have a lame Barbie decorating your computer monitor. She says, send in your suggestions and she’ll make me over and take pictures.

And if nobody cares enough to make suggestions..she’ll make me over however she wants. But you know, her fashion sense is like, lesbian-circa-1992*, so I’d really APPRECIATE ya’ll helping her out and all.

K’ thanksbye!

*Not that there’s anything wrong with that!–Ed.

When Nathan asks me about TV in the 70s

April 18th, 2007

…I’ll just say, “Son…they took a whole lotta drugs.”

Via CartoonBrew

The gospel of I’m Here for You

April 17th, 2007

Even though it’s impossibly far away, I can’t help thinking about what my approach to midwifery and birth education will be. Especially about what I want to teach in childbirth classes. And to any woman who’ll listen to me, really.

I’m not crunchy granola, first of all. Or rather, I am, but not for spiritual reasons. I like organic things because pesticides are bad for you, and torturing animals for hormone-pumped meat makes me uneasy. I like clean water and air, etc. because I enjoy continuing to exist without having to wear an ozone-proof suit to go outside. I like this planet, I think it’s a nice place to call home, and more importantly, we don’t have any replacement ones lined up at the moment. So it’s just plain stupid to make the one we have unlivable.

You do not need to believe in crystals, auras, past lives, Wicca, or any other religious ideas whatsoever to understand this.

You also don’t have to believe those things to be a homebirth and natural birth advocate. I think the science is there, it is tested, and it is logical. I think taking care of the psychological state of a person about to undergo tremendous physical and psychological stress is a no-brainer, quite frankly. Hospitals are the least relaxing and reassuring places on earth, short of the middle of a shopping center, to give birth. And at least most shopping centers have fountains and plants. And a food court, for if you need a giant pretzel to keep up your strength during labor. Now that would have been handy.

We associate hospitals with crisis, with pain and sickness, because that’s what they exist to treat. Birth was only moved into hospitals for the benefit of the doctors, not for the women…in fact, postpartum deaths initially rose when women began birthing in hospitals, thanks to doctors who didn’t understand why it was a good idea to wash your hands after touching a corpse, but before examining a patient.

Anyway. It’s improved now, but hospitals are still the best places to catch some nasty drug-resistant bugs. If you’re sick, or have a labor gone wrong, obviously it’s worth the risk. But if you don’t have to go there, you shouldn’t. And that has everything to do with the research I’ve read, and nothing to do with wanting to birth in the woods to meet my inner goddess. Though certainly, if that floats your boat, great. But that is not what motivates me.

While I was in my third trimester, I was told to do things like drink raspberry leaf tea, walk by the water, picture flowers opening, etc. etc., to make labor hurry up, none of which had any effect and all of which made me feel silly. Plus I hate hot tea. And while the tea was just an unproven but harmless birth-starting legend, the other two were sheer magical thinking; no different from when my mother was told to put an open pair of scissors under her pillow to “cut the pain of labor.”

Now I respect (and as a midwife, certainly won’t gripe about) the idea that some kinds of magical thinking can help some women go into and get through labor. But for me, it added stress; because if I did the magical thinking and nothing happened…well then obviously I wasn’t doing it hard enough. I wasn’t clapping enough and now Tinkerbell was going to die. And actually, I didn’t believe in it, and found it disquieting to be told to do something I thought was crap by people who were my support team. It felt patronizing. It felt like they didn’t believe in me either and so were giving me something to keep me from getting hysterical.

I think there are a lot of women out there like I was, facing birth with uncertainty. Not wanting the Hospital Special, but not really able to muster up the requisite enthusiasm for birth altars and mystic placenta-rituals. Childbirth is very powerful, but also very mundane. There is grunting, sweat, and poop (yours and the baby’s) involved, after all. It is not dignified, and not always particularly spiritual. And even if it is spiritual, the ready-made spirituality you get with a stereotypical crunchy-granola birth sometimes gets in the way of whatever real feelings the mother is having. Or even just her feeling of “screw the placenta, my ass hurts!”

As a midwife, I’d like to be able to honor all my client’s feelings without trying to fit them into any kind of a mold. If they’re spiritual, then I want them to tell me how that affects what they need from me, but not for me to tell them what anything means or should mean. If they’re not, then we’ll just concentrate on the basics; helping create an atmosphere that makes it possible for them to put their whole body and mind into birthing. What I call the Gospel of I’m Here for You.

The binary trap

April 15th, 2007

dbook.jpg

Over at ParentDish (which used to be Blogging Baby) I saw a mention of this book, and how much the writer’s husband liked it for their son.

Here’s the book’s description from Amazon:

If ever there was a book to make you switch off your television set, “The Dangerous Book for Boys” is it. How many other books will help you thrash someone at conkers, race your own go-cart, and identify the best quotations from Shakespeare? “The Dangerous Book for Boys” gives you facts and figures at your fingertips - swot up on the solar system, learn about famous battles and read inspiring stories of incredible courage and bravery. Teach your old dog new tricks. Make a pinhole camera. Understand the laws of cricket. There’s a whole world out there: …Chapters in “The Dangerous Book for Boys” include: The Seven Ancient Wonders of the World…Dinosaurs…Girls

(Emphases added.)

Aside from the Brit-centricity (conkers and cricket), notice anything a little….strange about this?

Like maybe, the idea that only boys would be interested in things like insects, or the solar system, or piracy, or dog tricks?

And yes, clearly, you can buy this for your daughter and she can enjoy it. I’m sure the author, if asked, would say exactly that.

But then….why is it “for Boys” at all? And if there is a “for Girls” version…what will be in it? Not science, history, games, or sports; those have already been clearly marked here: For Boys.

But there are science books for girls, and sports and history books that don’t discriminate by gender out there; why make a big deal about this somewhat obscure title?

Because it’s a symptom, a symptom of a way of thinking that erases women from view. When a book or toy is marketed to kids that carries this assumption, that girls are not people but merely one of many “topics” in a book for boys, the ones who have real interests, who want to know how to do things and create and learn–then it’s one of a million little erasures that a girl faces as she grows up. One of a million ways in which girls and women are left out of the picture of the world and reality that we build for our children. A picture built from books, games, and TV as well as from what we teach them directly.

It’s not just that toys follow–to a ridiculous degree–laws of gender segregation that seem to imply that boys and girls are different species entirely. That they can never play together, or have the same games. It’s not just segregation–it’s inequality.

Because as this book illustrates, the toys and interests given to boys span the whole world; science, history, art, games, sports. Monsters. Space. Superpowers. Boys are taught and encouraged to play games of power, control, heroism, accomplishment. Which, under the assumption that boys and girls have no similar interests, means that those things are not for girls. That girl toys are: fashion, beauty, motherhood, and decorative arts (like clothes) that are basically just more fashion and beauty. Boys do; girls beautify and beg to be noticed, wait to be rescued, scheme and plot for romance, because that is the only field in which they are encouraged from birth to excel.

It is instructive to consider, while insisting that boys and girls follow inborn mechanisms to play as they do, that the toys we give them shape that play in extremely direct ways. Kids imitate other kids; if a girl never sees a girl playing with a chemistry set, will she want to? If she notices that in any group of heroic warriors featured in books, movies and TV, female characters are always the exception, never even half of the team (and NEVER the leader), will she aspire to hero play? Princess Leia was OK, but why was she all girls had? There were umptilion Star Wars action figures; how many of them were female? And besides Leia, were any females of any plot importance whatsoever? No.

SeeJane.org is an organization that has actually commissioned some research into this particular problem: their 2005 report, Where the Girls Aren’t reveals that in the top grossing G-rated movies from 1990 to 2004, male characters outnumber females 3 to 1.

Of characters shown in groups, the ratio was generally 83% male to 17% female.

In addition, less than 1 in 5 crowd scene characters were female, and 4 out of 5 narrators were male.

Few toymakers and children’s show writers and parents will come out and say, blatantly, “boys are better than girls.” But what books and toys and movies do say, constantly and insidiously, is that girls are invisible, that they don’t matter to the plot much, that they are not leaders, not achievers. That they are a topic to be discussed, not a person on an equal plane with oneself that could be considered a fellow-creature.

Girls’ toys, even more now than when I was a kid, seem to be a pink-painted plastic wasteland of beauty rituals and fashion play, presumably because that’s what girls want. But is that true? Or is it that parents are so paranoid about getting their kids to act out their gender roles from day one that they’re pile on the stereotypes as a kind of insurance? It may be that retailers are just greedy and can see extra profit if they can sell a Boy’s XtremeSports JumpRope and a Girl’s SparklePrincess JumpRope, but would kids rebel if it was just a plain old jump rope they could both use? Probably not. As it is now, if there’s only a pink princess toy available, the boy is left out of playing altogether, unless he wants to be teased. Girls are teased for playing with boy toys, but less so, because that’s considered an understandable wish to be more like boys. Because boys are better.

Kids…both genders…like adventure and feeling powerful. They also like magic and costumes. They like colors (all of them, not just pink) and music, making up stories with their dolls/action figures and also running around like crazy things. But our weird gender hysteria about our kids has skewed it so that everything has to be A or B; Boy or Girl. Segregated, color-coded, all boundaries clearly marked.

And like most attempts at segregation, no matter how much the perpetrators claim “separate but equal”…it isn’t. It is not equal, it is not right, and it is certainly not necessary.

Nearly 17 months

April 12th, 2007

(pictures to come later)

Things have slowed down for us, or maybe we’ve just adjusted to the swiftness of the current. Nathan is moving at his own pace, and right at this moment, we’re keeping up. His own pace being, grow all your teeth as soon as possible, but walk slower than other kids; be bright and attentive and love to “read” your books, but speak only a few words in English (the rest in Toddler). Grow a little slower, but still be a 17-month-old in a body as big as a big 2-year old’s.

I’ll miss the sweet baby babbling, when he does learn real words, though I’m eager to hear him talk. It seems miraculous to see him walk, still awkward and stumping, arms bent at the elbows and held close to his sides, but walking all the same. Soon he’ll be using real words, and running, and using spoons, and it will be the most natural thing in the world. Right now all those things seem impossible to imagine. I mean, he’s still struggling with the whole sippy cup thing, even though I long to get rid of the bottles. And potty-training might as well be a trip to Mars.

Bedtimes can be bad and cranky, but sometimes they’re when he’s his funniest; all but asleep, he giggles and grins at you and flops around like he has no bones, looking for a comfy spot. He loves the lightweight pillow we got him, and knows that he’s supposed to put his head on it, but usually wrestles with it all night instead, rolling around in his crib. Sometimes he howls in the night and you have to pick him up (ooh, my back…) and he hugs you and puts his head on your shoulder and is comforted. Unless you try to put him back down without a bit of something in a bottle. Then, more howling.

More and more, he’s only waking once a night, and so his sleep deprived parents do occasionally feel less than dead in the mornings now. But there are no guarantees; every 3 nights of sleep still means 2 nights or so of more waking. We blame those teeth, though we’re down to the molars, which are the worst. Once they come in, I have the fantasy that he’ll start sleeping all night, and I’ll be able to work at 80% of my brain capacity, instead of the 45% or so I think I’m at now.

I do have just enough brain cells to pay attention to what he’s doing, and try to write it down and remember it, because so much happens so fast that it’s impossible to keep it all in mind. Which is why I’m glad he’s not speeding through every bit of it, that he has his own sweet leisurely pace. I want him to be someone who enjoys life, who doesn’t see it as a rat race, who may like competition but isn’t consumed by it. I want him to be a kid who finds his talent but also plays, with long blocks of time of doing nothing in particular but digging in the dirt, or playing hide and seek, or running through the sprinklers.

So many parents get into the Developmental Milestones competition, worrying about if little Wendell starts doing something a day later than little Wendy down the block. And sure, if Nathan does show a real delay, we’ll definitely jump on it to help him. So far, though, he’s puttering along at a fine pace and, especially when it comes to food, refusing to let anyone tell him when it’s time to do something new. I see his little self awake in there, taking it all in, communicating, sometimes being overwhelmed and sometimes jumping into the middle of things. He’s doing fine.

The older moms at work all have grown kids, and they were talking about the rat race high school is for so many; friendships lost when one had a half point more on her GPA, trying to game the system by taking easy classes, parents pressuring teachers to get that A, raise that score.

I just…no. I want Nathan to try, and to learn, but I don’t really care what his grades are so long as he passes. And I don’t buy the whole 4.0-is-a-ticket-to-Harvard thing…I mean, yes, if he wants Harvard, I guess we’ll think about that. But life is so, so much bigger than all of that mess. I don’t want him to miss it, to pursue a score that honestly, won’t make all that much difference down the line. There are plenty of colleges. He can find one that works for him, or find a college alternative that does, and providing he’s got survival skills, I’ll be happy for him. I’m not going to let him be lazy; he’ll do his homework, study for tests, write papers, complete what he’s assigned. And maybe he’ll be driven to be number one, or maybe I’ll have to nag him to pull in a high C.

But the standard of how well your child is doing, I want to remember then as now, is not: what measurement have they achieved on such and such scale compared to other kids? Rather, it’s; how well is he moving up? Is he making progress? Is there growth? So long as the answer is “yes” it’ll be impossible for me to be too unhappy.