Psychobabbling

Has anyone else noticed that all of the original Sesame Street muppets are male?  I’ve been watching a bit more Sesame Street in the past year than I have in, say, the past 30 years, and the addition of two relatively new female muppets, Abbie Cadabie and Zoe,  since my own Sesame Street heyday, made me notice their conspicuous absence in years past.   I totally didn’t even pay attention to this when I was a kid, but what is this communicating about gender?  Can you imagine a show with all female characters, and no one taking notice?  Sesame has been so progressive in the inclusion of diverse types of people in their neighborhood, so what’s up with the all-dude muppets? 

Ok, so I’m not there first person to notice this.   Here’s a study that found that male characters appeared twice as often as female characters in randomly selected episodes of Sesame Street (though this study predates the two new female muppets), and “the total number of characters portrayed in stereotypical roles was 10 times greater than characters portrayed in non-stereotypical roles.”  Why is this important?  As we all know, children learn the norms of society from, at least in some small part, television.  And though women are 51% of the population, they are usually portrayed as a minority or “other” group.  Just think about the use of male-normative language (this is a nice post too), like “mankind” to refer to both women and men, and what this implies about our cultural values.  I really expected better from you, Sesame Street.     

2 Comments | In: gender, media | | #

Some lively discussion has followed this article since I posted about it, and I was inspired to give it a second read after hearing one of the researchers on the radio this morning.  

While I agree with the main thrust of the article, I don’t agree that using “time out” is a form of love withdrawal.  I recommend it to many of the parents I work with, and they almost universally find it to be helpful in the restoration of peace and loving harmony in their homes.  The isolation that is involved in this technique is not meant to be from a parent’s love or affection, but from whatever was overstimulating/reinforcing the child to continue the undesired behavior.  For example, children who are disruptive, fighting, tantruming, etc.,  are often reinforced for their behavior by the attention that it brings, however negative.  The squeaky wheel gets the grease.  Directly reprimanding a child for this serves to reinforce the behavior further.  But removing them from that reinforcement communicates that the behavior is not acceptable.  

Another example: you are with your child at the check out aisle, and there are many lovely candy bars vying for the child’s attention.  The child screams that he/she wants a candy bar, and the more you try to talk the child out of it the more he/she wants it and screams louder.  The solution?  Remove the child from the store, however inconvenient that is for you.  If you end up giving the child a candy bar, you’ve just let them know, “hey, if you scream for long enough, I will give in and you’ll get your Snickers.”  It’s not a time out, but is serves the same purpose, which is letting the child know that this behavior is not a good idea by removing them from the situation, and and that it will not get them what they want. 

It is of course important to always explain to children why their behavior is unacceptable, why you are responding in this way, how to make better decisions in the future, and that this is part of your job as a parent which you take seriously because of how much you love them.  Love withdrawal plays no part in good parenting.

1 Comment | In: articles, commentary | | #

Sometimes the most eloquent writing about feminism springs from the minds of men.  Backpackingdad hits the nail on the head with this one.   He speaks about striving for true gender equality through greater balance not only in the work place but in the home,  and highlights how some women may have difficulty letting go of the reigns at the homestead despite the stated desire for equality.

“Part of the job is already being done as fathers step into at-home roles and immerse themselves very successfully. But here they face resistance from not only other men, who resist the changing roles and the infection of the workplace with domesticity. They also face a peculiar sort of resistance from women. Some women view at-home dads in a spectacularly evil light, as sexual prowlers hoping to seduce neighbourhood moms. But even more insidious is the casual assumption that men are buffoons when placed in a domestic role. This assumption, and the dismissal of male competence in the home and with the children, does more, I think, to deter men from stepping into those roles on their own than any pressure from male peers…

…  It is subtle misandry, misogyny’s dance partner, and it is an obstacle to the very balance and equality that would help you to never feel that kind of superiority, disappointment, and anger ever again. It is an obstacle to the creation of a class of men who collaborate with you to change social and economic structures that will result in gender equality and improved work-life balance. Think about the converse situation, in which men would congregate to laugh about the sad attempts of the newly “liberated” women to operate in a man’s world. Did it, does it, happen? Yes, I’m certain of it. But it is not something to be tolerated, and it is certainly not something to be lauded. “

Word, ladies.  Word.

No Comments | In: gender, work/family balance | | #

It’s been a while, but I found this to be a worthy article (from the New York Times) and important to read for anyone who parents.  Several parenting “experts” have continued to propose that the withholding of praise and affection is an effective form of discipline, while research seems to be supporting that such “conditional parenting” may not be the best approach:

“It turned out that children who received conditional approval were indeed somewhat more likely to act as the parent wanted. But compliance came at a steep price. First, these children tended to resent and dislike their parents. Second, they were apt to say that the way they acted was often due more to a “strong internal pressure” than to “a real sense of choice.” Moreover, their happiness after succeeding at something was usually short-lived, and they often felt guilty or ashamed.”

The authors offer an alternative to conditional parenting,

“In practice, according to an impressive collection of data by Dr. Deci and others, unconditional acceptance by parents as well as teachers should be accompanied by “autonomy support”: explaining reasons for requests, maximizing opportunities for the child to participate in making decisions, being encouraging without manipulating, and actively imagining how things look from the child’s point of view.”

I’ve always had a bad feeling about that Dr. Phil, but now there’s some data to back me up.

No Comments | In: articles, research | | #

This business about the Breast-Feeding Doll is everywhere (Motherlode, Bust, Opposing Views, to name a few).   If you haven’t heard,  a Spanish company has created a doll that breast-feeds, which will be sold in the U.S. next year.  Not only does the doll make sucking sounds when placed in the correct feeding position, but it is also sold with a halter top complete with flowers where nipples would be, for the would-be mother to wear.  On the one hand, this seems like a reasonable development in the functions that a doll plays, as there are already dolls that can be bottle-fed and diaper-changed.  But there is also a kind of ick factor that I can’t wrap my brain around.  I’m not sure how to describe the ick factor, nor do I think that it is a good argument against something.  I think Motherlode makes the best point, that though breast-feeding is natural and should be normalized,

“there are many other things that are natural for adults that children don’t necessarily need to be mimicking at five, no? “

I guess the question is whether this is one of those things that should be considered “adult,” and it brings up all sorts of things about how we sexualize breasts which are, first and foremost, feeding devices.   The most compelling argument I’ve seen against the doll is that it takes the creativity and imagination out of doll play.  You can have a plain old doll and use your imagination to do all sorts of things to care for it, without it being specifically designed to do it.  But I’m still not sure what to make of this whole thing, and I’m certainly not the only one.

No Comments | In: articles, commentary, feeding | | #

My little dude is turning 1 year old this month.  In some ways, the year has flown by, it seems like he was just born and now he’s an almost-walking, chatty (in his own language) little man.  And yet, when I look back at all of the things that happened between then and now, all of the things I didn’t know and how much I’ve learned, it’s hard to remember life without him and last July seems like a very long time ago.  Some things I’ve learned:

• It’s hard not to rely on cliche, when so many of them are true, like that parenthood is the hardest, most exhausting, and most wonderful thing ever. 
• Parenthood didn’t fundamentally change who I am, but it did make my life feel more meaningful (again with the cliches).  I was worried that I might be unrecognizable or that my identity would be lost in the transition, but besides an earlier bedtime and a stagnant passport I haven’t become a different person.  What have shifted are my priorities, which I guess makes the bedtime and passport things less important anyway.
• When calling in sick to work, don’t cancel the babysitter.
• Baby poop isn’t that gross when it’s your own baby.  But it’s still kind of gross. 
• I have a new appreciation for sweet potatoes and any food that can be easily smashed and served. 
• T.V. is even more hypnotic to babies than it is for adults; sometimes it’s just too easy.
• My relationship with my parents hasn’t changed as much as I’d heard it might, but I think they see me in a whole new light and I certainly enjoy trying to imagine them going through similar things with me that I am experiencing now with my dude. 
• It is really hard to find even somewhat gender neutral clothing for babies.  But I’m less squeamish about my dude wearing blue than I though I would be, it’s a nice color and makes his eyes sparkle. 
• The faint possibility that great harm will come to my child from a plane crashing into our apartment building, falling off a boat, or being stung by a West Nile virus-carrying mosquitto feels upsettingly possible when trying to fall asleep.

No Comments | In: personal | | #

I was thinking about how I haven’t been super compelled to post anything here in a while, and it seems that I have been spending less time thinking about being a parent, and more time just kind of being one.  Maybe it’s gotten more normal, or there’s a new normal, or at least a routine.  The parent- and kid-related articles I come across haven’t been jumping out at me as much as they have in previous months, and I feel like my identity has shifted from “mother” to “mother and some other stuff too.”  Maybe this is sort of the normal course of things, that the dude and my relationship with him has been incorporated into me and my life and it’s not something I think about in any sort of meta way because it just is what it is, everyday awesomeness and craziness with my guy.  That’s not to say that this won’t shift again, who knows.  But right now, I’m just loving his 5 teeth and his giggles and his fat feet.

No Comments | In: personal | | #

Apparently in Sweden, names have to be approved by the tax authority, and several have not made the cut, prompting the writing of this article from Motherlode.    The article references examples of children named “Q,” “Adolf Hitler,” “4 Real,” and “Google.”  Certainly, such names grab attention, but it’s not clear whether they cause actual harm, at least I can’t find any research to back up the strong reaction such names garner.  Do kids with funny names actually get beat up more often?  On the other hand, what is it like to grow up named after an atrociousperson who caused so much suffering?  I’m not sure whether to laugh, grimace, be dismissive, or call my congressional representative.

1 Comment | In: articles, commentary | | #

I enjoyed my first Mother’s Day as a mother a lot more than I thought I would.  In the past, I was caught up in the notion that Mother’s Day is a holiday created by card companies to guilt people into buying their products (which isn’t exactly the history of the holiday, just what it has become in some ways - Bust magazine had a great article on the history of Mother’s Day this month, but it’s not online or else I would share it with the group).    But it was nice to have strangers wish me a Happy Mother’s Day when I was walking down the street with my little dude, and to feel a part of something bigger that is motherhood and a day to recognize all that that means.  I didn’t mind the fancy brunch or mini cupcakes either. 

In that spirit, here’s a nice little piece from Livescience about why moms deserve Mother’s Day (as if you weren’t sure - thanks to Rational Moms for the link).  It presents a few stats about how hard moms work, and how difficult life can be for them, though I’m left thinking that instead of celebrating the sacrifice once a year, maybe dads could kick it up a notch?  But you knew I was going to say that.

No Comments | In: personal, work/family balance | | #

Amidst the anxiety and media hysteria about the swine flu, I appreciated finding this in my inbox the other day, a much welcome antidote to the fear and uncertainty.

No Comments | In: funny ha ha | | #