Psychobabbling

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 | | #

Among the heap of unsolicited advice and declarations I received while pregnant, I found the predictions of my child’s gender based on belly shape and heartburn the most hilarious.  This feature from Scientific American has undertaken the task of dispelling these and several other myths using, if you can imagine, actual scientific research.  Thanks to Rational Moms for the link.  By the by, I had major heartburn when I was pregnant, and the dude was born with hardly any hair on his little head.   So there goes that one.

No Comments | In: articles, personal, research | | #

From Motherlode.

No Comments | In: articles | | #

Here’s a little essay about why we moms should not be working outside of the home from Opposing Views:

“Raising children is a full-time job, one that dramatically alters the paths women were on prior to becoming mothers. Therefore, working full time while trying to raise young children is impossible. This is not anti-feminist, nor is it a matter of one’s politics. It is just a fact. No matter how much women would like to balance work and family, the endless demands of children don’t allow mothers to dedicate themselves fully to someone or something else. This doesn’t mean mothers must be out of the workforce permanently. But it does mean they’ll need to sequence their lives — plan their lives in such a way that they’ll be able to pursue work and motherhood, but at separate times. Or do them simultaneously when their children are older, as women have historically done.”

There are several good critiques of this argument in the comments section of this post, but I can’t help but add my own.  There is no mention of the responsibility of fathers in contributing to the care of their children and the author does not cite any research to back up the “fact” of the assertion that it is impossible to work full-time and raise a child.  Certainly, our culture needs to be more supportive of the integration of parenting in general with work outside the home (longer parental leave, for a start).  But balancing work and home responsibilities in a meaningful and healthy way is a real possibility.  To suggest that women need to stop everything to have kids neglects the fact that many families are not financially able to do so, and that women who want to work are happier and better parents when they are able to do so (which I posted about here).  Also, in a country where 50% of marriages end in divorce, allowing for women to have greater financial means and to be less dependent on their husbands will undoubtedly improve their circumstances if and when their marriages end (and similarly, it makes it more possible for wome to feel able to leave bad marriages).   In fact, this study found that women’s standard of living actually decreases 27% after a divorce, while for men it increases 10%.         

And, I’m sorry, is this 1950?  Did we gain nothing from second wave feminism?  I can’t believe people still buy into this crap.  I’m not arguing that mothers (or fathers, for that matter) should absolutely work outside of the home, but there is not only one good way to raise a child.  Like anything, I’m skeptical of either-or arguments, life is way more complicated than that.

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

Judith Warner wants to ban the breast pump.  In this New York Times article, she argues that women who need to be away from their babies for several hours a day should not feel bad about giving their little ones formula and that pumping is an unappealing and inhumane option.  I get where she’s coming from, but I’m also all for having options even if they are not optimal.  And there are many other reasons why a nursing mother might pump besides guilt or the slight health benefits of breastfeeding that she doesn’t mention, including physical discomfort and the fact that formula is friggin’ expensive.  Despite this, she poses some important questions:      

“Why, as a society, have we privileged the magic elixir of maternal milk over actual maternal contact, denying the vast, vast majority of mothers the kind of extended maternity leave that would make them physically present for their babies?

Why do we keep sticking our heads in the sand, putting all the burdens of our half-changed society on women – their “choices,” their “priorities,” their bodies – instead of figuring out reasonable ways to make our new family lives work?

Why do we, as women, accept all the guilt and pressure about breast-feeding that comes our way instead of standing up for what we need in order, in the broadest possible sense, to nourish and sustain ourselves and our families?”   

1 Comment | In: articles, feeding, work/family balance | | #