http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dionna-ford/time-magazine_b_1507799.html
Years ago, in a little farce I wrote for the (late, lamented) CATCO Shorts Festival, I included a line in which a mother, talking about her son, says, " I breast fed him for a long time, till his high school barred me from the cafeteria." I thought, at the time, it was a joke playing on the absurdity of breast feeding someone long after babyhood. In my innocence, imagine my surprise to read this article, and the Time Magazine cover story from which it derived.
Ok, let's stipulate something right now. These women are wrong.
Moving on, the issue here seems to be--what's that? What are you saying? How dare I judge the parenting decisions of perfect strangers? Well...someone has to do it. Someone needs to hold these people up to ridicule. I volunteer. There is a third rail of social politics these days, which seems to be "Never criticize a woman's parenting." People avoid it at all costs, afraid of reprisals from the mommy warrior classes. Avoiding these topics allows dumbasses like Jenny McCarthy to get away with not vaccinating her kids, and calling herself an expert in autism research just because she can use Google. In fact, I don't remember anything about neurology being mentioned on her Playmate Data Sheet.
No. Not every parenting decision is sacrosanct, and correct in and of itself. Just because you aren't starving your child, doesn't mean you aren't an idiot. People may call it a difference in approach, or new age parenting, or maybe even an embracing of ancient methods (which we KNOW is not the case--in ancient times, that three year old on the Time cover wouldn't be loafing around all day nursing, he'd be out in the fields, plowing behind a mule, and smoking unfiltered cigarettes). Well, it's mocking time, my little friend (and I am assuming here that I'm bigger than you, so step off)
J'Accuse:
1. Breastfeeding
Breastfeeding past the age when the child can carry on intelligible dinner conversation seems like poor parenting to me. Why retard that developing verbal skill by jamming your breast into his face every time he starts a hilarious anecdote about pooping during nap time in pre-school? It's laziness disguised as parenting choice--get off your ass and open a can of Spaghettios like a normal person.
Ladies. Please. Breastfeeding a three year old? Never mind you, it makes the child look ridiculous. Look at the face of the kid on the Time cover. That's the last time you'll see it looking content, when you consider the 12 years of playground hell he's in for, for being the cover boy who nursed on his mommy while wearing big boy pants. And hey, if a child is old enough to cheat his chin toward the camera in the photo sessions, he's old enough to suck on a juice box. For christ's sake!
Dionne said in her article that her four year old does not look at her breasts with any kind of sexual context. Well, I tell you, after four solid years of nursing, neither does anyone else.
And while I am on it...public breast feeding...avoid it, please. I know, I know, it's perfectly natural. Well, so is lancing a boil, but I don't want to see that either. If I had to give up dragging on a cigarette in public, your child can give up dragging on a ...
2. Nakedness
Being naked in front of your kids is also a poor parenting choice. When they are babies, sure, who cares? But when they are old enough to point and say " Look, tits!" then maybe its time to put on the tube top. Some say it's perfectly natural, and this is how we teach kids not to be ashamed of their bodies. Bullshit. You are just too lazy to do the washing. This isn't Fiji, people. This is the American Midwest, and parents should wear slacks and a golf shirt, at minimum, at all times. Even in bed.
3. War Toys
My sister, probably after reading an article in which a celebrity parent (who always seems to be so amazed at parenthood, especially when their nannies tell them about the cute thing the kid did) mentioned she didn't allow toy guns in the house, and decided to do the same thing. And my nephew pointed at her with his finger and said, " Pow!" Boys like guns. Most boys anyway. I myself dispatched so many Germans in my childhood my nickname was Audie Murphy. And this was in the 60s, when we weren't even at war with Germany. Let em play with guns. Don't feminize them. Not letting boys play with toy guns is really reverse judging--nowadays, we would NEVER discourage a boy who likes to play with dolls, would we? Don't judge the boy, just because he'd rather shoot Barbie than accessorize her. The same long-term breast feeders who claim it doesn't adversely affect the child's sexual development are usually the same people who say playing with toy guns will.
4. Deep Involvement
Be a person, don't be a professional parent. Believe me, your opinion stopped mattering to your child the day he or she made a friend. What do I mean by professional parents?...the ones who research everything, who involve themselves in all aspects of their child's life. Lighten up. Take the summer off--put some hotdogs and chips and Kool-aid out on the counter and relax. Read a book. Not a parenting book, unless it's Carrie. Accept that your children are secretive little newts who will come to you when they really need your counsel. And that will NEVER happen.
Take it easy. Low impact parenting is best. You don't need to join every committee in the PTO. You don't need to join the PTO. Show up to a few games, school plays, awards ceremonies. That's all you need to do. That's all your child wants you to do. Do you really think that by joining everything you'll make a difference in policy and educational or social impact? Mommy, please! My parents had me, then there was some childhood there for a few years, in which I saw them now and then, and then I was 18 and gone. This is healthy, and time-honored. Get out of your kids way.
It has been my experience that the people whose parents were extremely involved with their lives, are the people who tend to keep things from their parents even in adulthood. Conversely, laisse-faire parents tend to produce kids who enjoy their company (once they reach adulthood--no child enjoys his parents' company after the age of 6 --7 if he's still breast-feeding).
5. Names
Immature people give their kids stupid names, because they want the cool factor to reflect back on them. They don't think about the kid who has to go through life as Apple Martin. ( Actually, I have always believed Gwyneth Paltrow named her kid that in exchange for a healthy fee from Steve Jobs). It's like a bride who focuses everything on the wedding day, not so much the hundreds of days post nuptial. These parents are thinking only about the few years of people saying, " Oh what an interesting name!" and then later, to their friends, " What an idiot!"
Let the child's character be the most interesting part of her life. I submit naming a girl Jane or Sally, or a boy William or James requires them to rise above the commonplace nature of those names. A child named River Phoenix, however, may feel life is pointless and turn to drugs. Whatever happened to him, anyway?
And let's try to keep names somewhat consistent, please. No one named Seamus Moskovitz, or Jean-Baptist Zhang-wei. Please. Life is hard enough for all of us as it is.
So, I could go on, but I suspect you are tired.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Friday, May 4, 2012
Where I Fail As a Liberal...
I have always identified myself as a political liberal. Not "progressive", which is a cravenly concession to conservatives that they have succeeded in defining "liberal" is a pejorative word. I am a liberal. As such, unlike conservatives, the viewpoints I embrace have been on the right side of most social movements for the past couple of centuries--civil rights, women's suffrage, social security--I could go on and on.
I am not talking about Republicans and Democrats, whose party philosophies underwent a magnetic reversal of the poles back in the late 19th century. When the Repubs were created, they were the radical, liberal party, opposed to slavery, while the Democrats were conservative, all about state's rights, which was code then and now for the suppression or reversal of personal rights and the law of the land. By the end of the 19th century, the Repubs were the party of the monied classes, and the Dems were the party of the people. So, enough with party affiliation...as someone once said, they ain't but a dime's worth of difference between them. I f you don't believe that, look up how few the differences are between the Obama Administration and the previous Bush Administration. But do it on your own time--I am talking about other things here.
I am a liberal. Not progressive. And not that " social liberal, fiscal conservative" sort of hedge you hear a lot people call themselves. If anything, I am the opposite--I tend to be socially conservative, and fiscally liberal. There are many aspects to our social culture that I don't care for at all, or am uncomfortable with, or look upon with disdain. The difference between me and a conservative is that I am ok with those aspects of society existing and being protected by law, and conservatives aren't. And as far as fiscal matters, I think most of you have too much money and the government needs to relieve you of some of it. I think the government knows better than you what to do with your money, because you'll just keep it, or buy 4 wheelers, or pass it to your useless children, whereas the government will repurpose it to medical research, defense, infrastructure, schools, the poor.
So there we are. I can see some of my conservative friends and family--if they managed to make it this far--turning purple with apoplexy...
But there are some areas where my lib credentials kind of fail:
Environment:
Sorry, my brothers and sisters, I really don't care. No that's too harsh--I care, but not enough to do anything about it. And before you bombard me with stats, and pics of drowning polar bears, let me say again, I stipulate that all of it may be true. I believe the climate is changing, I believe man is causing a large part of it...it's just that if it's a choice between a documentary on the melting of the polar ice caps and a Reds game, it's strike three for the docu. We just got a blue recycling bin from the city. Unless Dani fills it, that thing is just gonna take up space in my garage...maybe I can use it to store the pesticides and weed killers that are cluttering up my shelves.
Food:
The bullshit about "organic" and "natural" and "slow food" and "eating locally" makes my ass tired. Literally. My ass hangs about six inches lower whenever I hear someone drool about the glories of their local veggie co-op. If I want an orange, and it's January, I am buying one. If I am looking for some ground beef, and the package I want states the animal was genetically altered, it's going in the cart. I hate politicizing food. I know the arguments for politicizing it, and they aren't persuasive to me. I think of the ancient days, when food was just food. You ate what you could get, and moved on. The world advanced to a global market for food, where out of the way exotic foods were available 24/7/365, and that, people,is a good thing. I know nothing can replace the smug feeling you get when you eat something grown within your county, but I'll stack up against it the smugness I feel eating Spanish grapes, Japanese beef, and Brazil nuts all in the same day.
Crime and Punishment:
I get that society is to blame in many ways for a person's misdeeds. Our environment shapes, or misshapes, us. How else do you explain the massive number of bank robbers that came out of Charlestown, Mass., or the large percentage of smartasses that came from the Mann household back in the 60s? It's the environment.
I know that a person who murders another person is a complex mix of social and familial pressures, and these things culminate in an act of unspeakable rage. Maybe that person had a horrific childhood, and an adulthood of brutality and privation. Very sad. And it's something we should address as we strap him onto the gurney, and pump his arm full. I know, who among us is qualified to play God? Well...me. I volunteer. I'll play God. Bring me files, and I'll sentence to death the ones who need it. Because, even though I am not southern, I do adhere to the southern creed that "they is some folks need killin'"
NPR
I know, Pravda to the left wing. I listen to it every day. And every day, I laugh at it's pretentiousness, and grind my teeth at its...pretentiousness. Why? Jeez, where to I start?
Ok, style...these hosts reeeaallly wish they on the BBC. Why else do they say someone is "on holiday?" No one goes on holiday, not in America they don't. We go on a vacation. No one is "in hospital" or sitting "at table", either. Not here. Hospitals and tables are not states of being in America. They are things. Here, we are "in A hospital" and we sit " at A table." If I ever hear Robert Siegel say he's goes to the 6th floor on a lift, I am gonna drive right to DC and kick his pretentious ass. Also, NPR hosts, like their heroes on the BBC, ask questions the same way, prefacing it with " I wonder..." as in " I wonder, have you always been this pretentious and idiotic?"
Another thing. Dead jazz musicians. Do you know how many jazz music stations there left in this country? 6. To cover the whole country. 6.
Ok, that's not true, I don't really know how many jazz stations there are in America, but if Columbus is any indicator, 6 can't be too far off. So...why does NPR feel the need to cover the death of every sideman who ever played a gig with someone who formed his own group after being a sideman for Charlie Parker? Or even live dead jazz musicians--the other day Terry Gross did an interview with a Dutch jazz drummer. DUTCH??? Not even American?
Why not cover the death of Shakespearean actors? There's a lot of them, in theatres all around the country. Surely some of them have died. But you never hear about that. Only dead jazz musicians. Why? Because it is assumed (wrongly) that an inside knowledge of jazz makes you seem cool. How else could these bespectacled, balding, sparse-bearded, early middle-aged liberals feel cool, unless talking about Coltrane's "incendiary and seminal" riffs on his Live at the Blue Spot bootlegged recordings? Reflected cool isn't very cool, guys.
Anyway, other than that, I say down with the rich and powerful, "bite me" to the privileged, and " I pity you" to the poor and average who have been conned by the fat cat Republicans to be their pawns on the front lines. Someday, you will all be re-educated...
I am not talking about Republicans and Democrats, whose party philosophies underwent a magnetic reversal of the poles back in the late 19th century. When the Repubs were created, they were the radical, liberal party, opposed to slavery, while the Democrats were conservative, all about state's rights, which was code then and now for the suppression or reversal of personal rights and the law of the land. By the end of the 19th century, the Repubs were the party of the monied classes, and the Dems were the party of the people. So, enough with party affiliation...as someone once said, they ain't but a dime's worth of difference between them. I f you don't believe that, look up how few the differences are between the Obama Administration and the previous Bush Administration. But do it on your own time--I am talking about other things here.
I am a liberal. Not progressive. And not that " social liberal, fiscal conservative" sort of hedge you hear a lot people call themselves. If anything, I am the opposite--I tend to be socially conservative, and fiscally liberal. There are many aspects to our social culture that I don't care for at all, or am uncomfortable with, or look upon with disdain. The difference between me and a conservative is that I am ok with those aspects of society existing and being protected by law, and conservatives aren't. And as far as fiscal matters, I think most of you have too much money and the government needs to relieve you of some of it. I think the government knows better than you what to do with your money, because you'll just keep it, or buy 4 wheelers, or pass it to your useless children, whereas the government will repurpose it to medical research, defense, infrastructure, schools, the poor.
So there we are. I can see some of my conservative friends and family--if they managed to make it this far--turning purple with apoplexy...
But there are some areas where my lib credentials kind of fail:
Environment:
Sorry, my brothers and sisters, I really don't care. No that's too harsh--I care, but not enough to do anything about it. And before you bombard me with stats, and pics of drowning polar bears, let me say again, I stipulate that all of it may be true. I believe the climate is changing, I believe man is causing a large part of it...it's just that if it's a choice between a documentary on the melting of the polar ice caps and a Reds game, it's strike three for the docu. We just got a blue recycling bin from the city. Unless Dani fills it, that thing is just gonna take up space in my garage...maybe I can use it to store the pesticides and weed killers that are cluttering up my shelves.
Food:
The bullshit about "organic" and "natural" and "slow food" and "eating locally" makes my ass tired. Literally. My ass hangs about six inches lower whenever I hear someone drool about the glories of their local veggie co-op. If I want an orange, and it's January, I am buying one. If I am looking for some ground beef, and the package I want states the animal was genetically altered, it's going in the cart. I hate politicizing food. I know the arguments for politicizing it, and they aren't persuasive to me. I think of the ancient days, when food was just food. You ate what you could get, and moved on. The world advanced to a global market for food, where out of the way exotic foods were available 24/7/365, and that, people,is a good thing. I know nothing can replace the smug feeling you get when you eat something grown within your county, but I'll stack up against it the smugness I feel eating Spanish grapes, Japanese beef, and Brazil nuts all in the same day.
Crime and Punishment:
I get that society is to blame in many ways for a person's misdeeds. Our environment shapes, or misshapes, us. How else do you explain the massive number of bank robbers that came out of Charlestown, Mass., or the large percentage of smartasses that came from the Mann household back in the 60s? It's the environment.
I know that a person who murders another person is a complex mix of social and familial pressures, and these things culminate in an act of unspeakable rage. Maybe that person had a horrific childhood, and an adulthood of brutality and privation. Very sad. And it's something we should address as we strap him onto the gurney, and pump his arm full. I know, who among us is qualified to play God? Well...me. I volunteer. I'll play God. Bring me files, and I'll sentence to death the ones who need it. Because, even though I am not southern, I do adhere to the southern creed that "they is some folks need killin'"
NPR
I know, Pravda to the left wing. I listen to it every day. And every day, I laugh at it's pretentiousness, and grind my teeth at its...pretentiousness. Why? Jeez, where to I start?
Ok, style...these hosts reeeaallly wish they on the BBC. Why else do they say someone is "on holiday?" No one goes on holiday, not in America they don't. We go on a vacation. No one is "in hospital" or sitting "at table", either. Not here. Hospitals and tables are not states of being in America. They are things. Here, we are "in A hospital" and we sit " at A table." If I ever hear Robert Siegel say he's goes to the 6th floor on a lift, I am gonna drive right to DC and kick his pretentious ass. Also, NPR hosts, like their heroes on the BBC, ask questions the same way, prefacing it with " I wonder..." as in " I wonder, have you always been this pretentious and idiotic?"
Another thing. Dead jazz musicians. Do you know how many jazz music stations there left in this country? 6. To cover the whole country. 6.
Ok, that's not true, I don't really know how many jazz stations there are in America, but if Columbus is any indicator, 6 can't be too far off. So...why does NPR feel the need to cover the death of every sideman who ever played a gig with someone who formed his own group after being a sideman for Charlie Parker? Or even live dead jazz musicians--the other day Terry Gross did an interview with a Dutch jazz drummer. DUTCH??? Not even American?
Why not cover the death of Shakespearean actors? There's a lot of them, in theatres all around the country. Surely some of them have died. But you never hear about that. Only dead jazz musicians. Why? Because it is assumed (wrongly) that an inside knowledge of jazz makes you seem cool. How else could these bespectacled, balding, sparse-bearded, early middle-aged liberals feel cool, unless talking about Coltrane's "incendiary and seminal" riffs on his Live at the Blue Spot bootlegged recordings? Reflected cool isn't very cool, guys.
Anyway, other than that, I say down with the rich and powerful, "bite me" to the privileged, and " I pity you" to the poor and average who have been conned by the fat cat Republicans to be their pawns on the front lines. Someday, you will all be re-educated...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)