Strollerderby : Salon

Pain in Childbirth May Be, Well, Pointless Now?

Kelly Mills — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:33:00 GMT

Hmmm, this is real interesting. Some natural childbirth advocates suggest that the pain in childbirth adds something valuable to the birth process, helping mothers bond with their babies and even bringing um, sexual pleasure (in some cases, but not mine, oh lordy no!) However, a study discussed here in Salon (via Jezebel) suggests that theory may be backwards. Instead, labor and delivery pain might have served to signal to the mother that she should seek assistance, and in fact drive her to desire "companionship and security" from others. From an evolutionary standpoint, this could have meant people who sought help and protection during times like childbirth and illness were more likely to survive. (Hey, if the degree of labor pain indicated individual evolutionary fitness, I would have totally had it made! Um, it doesn't, by the way.)

So, if pain has simply functioned to drive delivering mothers to seek companionship (personals ad, anyone?) then perhaps it's a perk we don't really need any more. And it could be that people are suffering without it serving any real need. Cough.

Okay, I'm sorry, but I like this take on things, curmudgeon that I am. I do think in some circles there's a strange sort of romanticism attached to labor pain, and even the idea of "natural" childbirth as being somehow noble or righteous. Buuut, that said, there are risks attached to the interventions designed to alleviate the pain of labor, and women should be informed of those as well before making any decision. I think the problem is that childbirth is so fraught with anxiety for so many of us---not only because it hurts, but because lots of us want to make the "right" choice for our babies and ourselves. Turns out "right" for me was an blessed, welcome epidural administered after I tried to go natural for a long time, but I would not think of telling you it ought to be the right way for you.

Only 43% of British Moms Offered Home Birth. Outrage!

They Say: Antibiotics For Preterm Labor May Do More Harm Than Good

Come Again? Orgasmic Childbirth

Related on Babble:

Insufferable: Why do people talk about managing birth pain, not eliminating it?

Sarah Palin, Flute Virtuoso!

Madeline Holler — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:27:00 GMT

Look, this is what happens when you introduce a virtual unknown as your running mate. Every interview, every little skeleton in her closet, every little photo or video ever taken of her in a swimsuit competition, debate and, now, flute performance gets played.

Today's peek at Palin in performance, we bring you, the talent competition from the 1983 Miss Alaska beauty pageant.

Incidentally, she won ... runner-up.

Video: YouTube [via Salon]

Hockey Moms on Palin: She Refused to Carry the Juice

Madeline Holler — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:01:00 GMT

"Hockey Moms for Truth" have come out with a damning video of Sarah Palin, the VP candidate who described herself to the nation as "just your average hockey mom." According to these women, she was never a very good one (ice chest with no handles, indeed!).

[via Politico, via Salon]

Feeding the Kids at a Soup Kitchen

Madeline Holler — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:29:00 GMT

Terrible Mother blogger Heather Ryan has a moving essay, a part of Salon's "Pinched" series, about taking her kids to a soup kitchen last summer. The fully employed, fully insured, single mother of three wasn't there to give her privileged kids a gritty life lesson on how the other half lives. They were the other half. Or, at least a growing number of the other half.

Even though Ryan had loaded up earlier that week at the food bank, she knew if they didn't take advantage of a free dinner for families with children in her city, they wouldn't have anything to eat by the end of the month. She sucked up her pride, packed up the kids and went.

Ryan's oldest daughter's reaction to the meal is understandable. And sad. And Ryan's new insight into "the system" and how it can shape attitudes is eye-opening.

But what's got me feeling rage is the big ticket item that put her in financial jeopardy that summer in the first place: childcare! For three kids, she had to pay $1,800 per month. And her kids are older -- not babies, who command an even higher rate.

I always find it surprising how limited our discussions of childcare are in this country, usually starting and stopping with: should you or shouldn't you. What about when you have to?

There's so little help with it and, as is likely the case with Ryan, she probably makes too much to qualify for the help anyway. Even though she -- and gobs of lower-middle to middle-class families like hers -- need it. Especially now. Especially this summer!

So is this recession kicking your family's ass? Have you ever had to go to a food bank or a soup kitchen?

Photo: Salon

It's Hard Out There for a Mom Who Says 'No'

Madeline Holler — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:57:00 GMT

Here's how the arguments go: I say how unregulated advertisement aimed directly at kids is contributing to childhood obesity rates among other societal ills. You remind me I'm the parent, I have the right to tell my kid "no," grow up, be the adult, how about a little personal responsibilty?

Here's the deal: I do say "no," all the time. Almost every time, truly. I've had a strict "no characters -- ever" policy, just so there were no gray areas. I even pass over the bargain clothes if they are emblazoned with Hannah Montana or Raven or Bratz or whatever. My seven-year-old knows this and mostly doesn't bother asking anymore.

Those times where there is a request for Sponge Bob this or Princess Whoever that, I set out the invisible lectern and launch into my diatribe on how this particular cereal is displayed just where they'll see it and the reason Johnny Depp is on a candy wrapper is so they'll want me to buy it. If the response is a whine, I go ahead and point out that Company X wants them to whine so I'll give up and I usually finish with "Your whining has strengthened my resolve! The answer now is especially 'no'!"

But damn. My resolve is growing weak. I'm really tired of it all. And I'm not convinced that all the no's now will result in them making better choices later. The thing is, personal responsibility/no regulation folks, parents are up against a lot. I'm pretty sure we're not winning either.

The Federal Trade Commission recognizes this too. They commissioned a study and found that the food industry spends $1.6 billion on all kinds of marketing to kids -- not just TV commericals, but those maddening grocery store displays and online brand interaction games and contests, school donations and more.

Here's some of what the study found (from AP via Salon):

The commission studied spending directed at children ages 2-17. Spending on soda marketing came to $492 million, with the vast majority of that spending directed toward adolescents. Fast food restaurants reported spending close to $294 million, which was divided about evenly between children and adolescents. For cereals, companies spent about $237 million, with the vast majority of that targeted to children under age 12.

Also, the Internet ads are completely unregulated and may differ from what is on TV and if you don't know exactly what you're kid is seeing online, well, then, the marketers have won. They always win.

Kathryn Montgomery, a communications professor at American University, said "Parents who are concerned abut their children's eating habits have to understand that you can't just look at what's happening on television. That's not the way it is anymore. It's a pervasive marketing environment."

Anyway, the FTC made some recommendations based on the report, including calling on marketers to use their money and ingenuity on promoting healthful foods and excercise in the same way they promote the other crap.

Personally, and here's where the initial argument begins again, I'd like to see tighter regulation of advertisements directed at children and strict limits on it as well. Un-American, I know. But my personal responsibility only gets me (and my kids) so far. You too, you know, you too.

How are you teaching your little ones to be media savvy? How do you keep from giving up?

A Nation of Wimps

How to be an annoying camp parent

Congress Moves To Ban Phthalates, Despite Bush Opposition

Photo: in-sect.com

Homophile Texan Wishes Son Were Gay

Madeline Holler — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:35:00 GMT

Much like this Texas woman, I always thought that if I gave birth to a boy, I would want him to be gay.

The Salon writer's reasons are different from mine. She wanted someone to watch musicals with and whose interior design judgment could be trusted. Me? I'm not much into Project Runway and sort of hate shopping. I just don't need the competition from eventual girlfriends and female life partners a son would have the insensitivity to drag through my house -- MY HOUSE! -- and who would take his attention away from me (me!).

Case in point, from Salon:

I hadn't counted on my gay son's being delivered to me via a wonderfully winsome girlfriend with a whiff of the young Audrey Hepburn about her, yet that is what has happened. Overnight, my offspring, who believed that Oliver Twist and other plucky motherless orphans had gotten a sweet deal, became willing to do anything my heart desired. Just so long as Audrey was on board. And since Audrey adores board games, art openings, nibbling delicate sandwiches in precious cafes and hanging out with an old lady whom she reminds of the young Audrey Hepburn, that is precisely what we've been doing. Sigh.

As I suspected -- said competition for my son's attention would be skinny too! Audrey Hepburn ...

Call me insecure, call me needy, but one of the biggest rewards of parenting isn't necessarily seeing all your hard work paid back in the offspring's happiness in the world. Rather, it's how every day my two girls once again pronounce me the still undefeated winner of a popularity contest, beauty pageant and Quiz Bowl -- all before I've finished my morning coffee.

Hey, I don't need any real competition.

Moms of boys, what's your take?

Homophobic Brits Convince Heinz to Hold the Mayo

What Kind of Mom Are You?

California Streamin': I Can't Get Enough of These Wedding Photos

Man dresses up as a woman to marry a man

Image: Salon

Locally Grown Ain’t All That

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:45:00 GMT

Anyone with a shred of concern for the environment knows that locally grown produce is preferable to supermarket produce, right? Wrong—that is, according to Salon writer Roberta Kwok, who's done some serious squash-related research.

The common sense argument for buying local is that transporting food long distances between the producers and the distributors uses up unnecessary fuel. But this argument fails to take into account the fact that conventional distributors drive to supermarkets in big trucks packed with produce, while farmers markets are stocked by Fords and Chevys carrying only, say, 100 pieces of fruit. Which method has the lighter carbon footprint?

Kwok busted out her calculator at a San Francisco farmers market, and found that, out of five food categories—apples, oranges, lettuce, squash, and greens—wholesalers beat out local growers in everything except squash. Score one for the Man.

But, Kwok acknowledges, precise calculations are tricky: do more customers bike to the farmers market than to the supermarket? Do more people buy organic at farmers markets than from wholesalers? And what about the wholesome, touchy-feely goodness of walking around a farmers market with your burlap sack of veggies on your shoulder, smiling at your neighbors and tossing a coin to the local organ grinder? Where does that fleeting sense of communal well-being rank on the carbon scale?

In other words, we could all drive ourselves crazy every time we buy an apple—because unless you grow your own food, you’re doing something wrong.

This is getting depressing. I’m off to Stop and Shop to buy a ready-made apple pie.

Image: Salon.com

Let's Put on a Show

Jen Chaney — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:28:00 GMT

With the Tony Awards coming up on Sunday -- I know, you've been counting the minutes -- Salon decided to pay tribute to the school musical with this fun sto ry that highlights several videos of real productions found on YouTube. (Ah, if only the memorable performances in my high school's version of "Kiss Me Kate" could have been shared via the Internet back in the day.)

As polished and amazing as a Broadway show can be, there is still something uniquely moving and inspirational about watching a bunch of kids put on a show. Salon's Mark Schone describes finding these clips as stumbling on "a vein of unalloyed joy." Allow yourself the same joy by watching this highlight reel of moments from productions of "Fiddler on the Roof," "Oklahoma" and "Grease," then dig into the other gems embedded in the story.

(And yes, the kid playing Danny in one of those "Grease" numbers does look like he's 27. Don't worry about it -- just keep burning up that quarter-mile.)

Image: Tony Award Via Herald-dispatch.com

Immigrant Gay Folks Face New Challenges

Kelly Mills — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:00 GMT

Following the recent Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage, it's clear that some things are gonna change around here. (For starters, you may want to book that popular wedding venue extra early.) But Sandip Roy points out that for some immigrant gay people, a whole new situation has opened up.

In some cultures, being single is worse than being gay. So families who previously gave up on dreams of a married son or daughter may now have a whole new reason to pressure the kids to find a mate and get hitched. Roy even speculates gay arranged marriages might someday be a possibility. And I guess it goes without saying that families may now start aggressively nudging gay couples to have kids ASAP. It's an excellent article, and it will be interesting to see how this turns out for all of us.

Gay marriage legalized

Californians support gay marriage

Pole Dancing Kits and Other Modern Toys

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 21 May 2008 22:30:00 GMT

Padded bras for first graders, bikini waxes for eight-year-olds, pole dancing kits sold alongside Etch-a-sketches in the toy store—excuse me, but how did this happen? How is it affecting girls' self-image? And, um, what happened to feminism? These are a few of the questions tackled in a recent Salon interview with M. Gigi Durham, author of “The Lolita Effect: The Media Sexualization of Young Girls and What We Can Do About it.”

As her book title would suggest, Durham places the burden of sexualizing girls at increasingly young ages squarely on the media’s shoulders. She argues that many companies are looking to exploit tweens’ increasingly significant contribution to the commercial sector by selling them traditional messages about femininity that the older generation of women has by and large rejected.

Interestingly, Durham connects the commercial sexualization of young girls with women’s inability to enjoy their sexuality later on. The abstinence-only sex education programs that have become increasingly prevalent in the Bush years combined with media’s message that “You must look like Barbie to be sexy” creates a very confusing, potentially dangerous backdrop against which young women come to understand their sexuality. Even as teen girls are encouraged to ignore their own sexuality, they’re told, “If you’ve got it, flaunt it. And if you don’t have it, spend a lot of money until you get it.”

Durham’s advice to parents? Discuss, but don’t censure. For instance, instead of forbidding your daughter to read Seventeen magazine, ask her what she thinks of that model’s look or that article about how to make boys like you. And she says that this dialogue about media propaganda should start, in modified form of course, as soon as your kids can talk. Anyone out there tried this method?

Photo: Girlshop.com

5 Reasons We're Falling Behind Our Parents

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:01:00 GMT

Nan Mooney's book "Not Keeping Up with Our Parents" describes the decline of the professional middle class in America and points to a few key reasons our generation is faltering when it comes to money-matters.

Apparently, it has little to do with cutting out lattes:

1. Homeownership no longer means stability - We may own houses, big houses, but we own less of them as a % than prior generations.

2. The dual-income trap - Since wages have stagnated, it now usually requires two incomes to make ends meet. Add to that the high cost of childcare and the problem continues.

3. Shame of financial instability keeps people quiet and inactive - In a culture of "personal responsibility" people blame themselves and so don't hold government accountable in any way.

4. Student Debt - People carry student loans now for 20, 30, 40 years with no reprieve.

5. Consumer goods may be cheaper but they are the same % of our income as they were in the 70s.

Ms. Mooney's premise, that externalities might have more to do with the faltering middle-class than personal profligacy, is a kind of relief in a time when many of us are hunkered down, head in hands, wondering what the hell happened! For more on this topic, go here.

Parent Trap, Baby Crap

Madeline Holler — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:33:00 GMT

Remember the mile-long checklist of stuff your area mega-store recommended for your baby registry? Stuff your mom had never heard of, like breast pads, and stuff you had never heard of, like, um, everything else? Of course you know now, but did you even know back then there were so many baby shampoos to choose from?

This was your entry to Parenting, Inc., what one author calls the modern way parents' every fear, hope and dream are exploited to get them to buy things like a souped up baby blanket (the Miracle Blanket) and $800 Bugaboos.

Salon interviewed Pamela Paul, author of the new book "Parenting, Inc." which looks at the new ka-jillion dollar market of all things baby/kid/parent.

Personally, I think we parents know we're being taken for a ride, but swaddling a kid isn't a natural skill all of us develop, hence, the Miracle Blanket. And just try to pry the Bugaboo out of the hands of actual city dwellers. Turns out, they're worth every penny for people who actually haul their kids longer distances than from the SUV to the mall entrance. These are conveniences for parents, not enhancements for the baby. I am very much in favor of convenience for me.

Still, I get the author's point. Other products in the crosshairs: baby signing classes, Baby Einstein videos (I think we all agree on that one), infant sleep positioners, and Time's Up/Time Out Teddy Bear (yes, that's stupid).

What totally unnecessary baby thing do you think, in hindsight, was probably a load of baby crap? For us, quite literally, it was the Diaper Genie.

The Internet is Not the Devil

Kelly Mills — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 22:31:00 GMT

It seems that every generation views bashing the up-and-coming one as a kind of sport, and this one is no exception. Where older folks once lamented rock music and long hair as markers of the end of civilization, now we have teenagers who are ignorant and narcissistic and spend so much time online that they can no longer interact with real people in the real world. Well, Emily Goldwasser at Salon isn't buying it, and she says the internet is not a danger and a disaster for our kids. She's responding in part to a phone survey of teens that showed a "stunning ignorance" of history and literature.

Boy, does she make some good points in this excellent article: She highlights that with blogs and social networking sites, we now have a generation of kids who are (gasp) voluntarily writing. The internet has "created a generation, perhaps the first, of writers, activists, storytellers" and all our screaming isn't going to stop that juggernaut. In addition, the kids today also know how to find information online, and therefore google has freed up their brains to dig deeper into topics. The real problem, it seems, is that this makes us very nervous. "We're afraid. Our kids know things we don't. They drove the presidential debates onto YouTube and very well may determine the outcome of this election. They're texting at the dinner table and responsible for pretty much every enduring consumer cultural phenomenon: iPod, iTunes, iPhone; Harry Potter, 'High School Musical'; large hot drinks with gingerbread flavoring." You know, I do believe she's right. I just hope when my kid is a teen, she'll have my back.

Not Cut Out To Be a Mom?

Kelly Mills — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:01:00 GMT

There's a couple stories (via Jezebel) on one of the big taboos: What happens when you have a baby and suspect you made a terrible, horrible mistake? Is it possible that some women just aren't made for motherhood? Lucy Beresford interviewed many women who had at a minimum, serious ambivalence about being a mother, and says that our inability to talk about this causes serious damage to both mothers and children. For this silent minority, bonding and attachment just don't happen, and the results are tragic for everyone involved.

Why do some women find maternal instincts less than instinctual? Beresford traces the bonding problems to unresolved conflicts. Vicki Glemblocki, whose book "The Second Nine Months: One Women Tells the Real Truth About Becoming a Mom. Finally." is excerpted in Salon, simply shares the utter despair that accompanies motherhood for some of us. I'd guess some people probably aren't cut out to be moms, just because it isn't for everyone, despite what you might hear about how utterly fulfilling it is. As for me, I discovered after my daughter was born that it took a loooong time to bond, maybe a year, and I could go into long explanations but it really had to do with both her temperament and my personality. One year in and I felt much better, and I've since met other women who felt the same way. And let me tell you, talking about it with people who understood fixed something deep. It's time to take this one off the taboo list, for everyone's sake.

FEMA Trailers, Homes to Thousands, a Known Danger

Madeline Holler — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:03:00 GMT

So here's yet another sad story, a bit of evidence that national leaders would just like the problems left by Hurricane Katrina to go away. (Anyone notice that it went, yet again, unremarked upon by our president and, while we're at it, doesn't really come up in candidate stump speeches this primary season?)

It turns out, those teeny tiny trailers that were supposed to be temporary but are actually starting to seem permanent to the nearly 40,000 people still living in them. Well, those trailers are toxic, off-gassing formaldehyde and upping risks of cancer and birth defects for those who live in them. And officials have known about this. And they acted to NOT act on it.

An investigative reporter for Salon lays it all out today. CBS is reporting the intentional cover-up too.

Apparently reports of sickness, bloody noses, breathing problems and death in the trailers started coming in shortly after the first wave of them was opened up for residency after the storm. But the CDC watered down not only the known ill effects of formaldehyde, but suppressed repeated warnings of its best scientists.

Photo: CBS News

Breaking News: Salon Finds a Non-Dysfunctional Family

Kelly Mills — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 21:35:00 GMT

In these modern times, claiming to be from a dysfunctional family is about as novel as shopping online for gifts. At least one movie studio always comes out with a film about a zany, eccentric family who alternately abuse each other and teach each other about the power of love; news sources print columns about how to survive holiay dinners with the relatives; and some people drink too much and pass out under the strings of lights that snake over many storefronts and rooftops. Estranged family members are noticable by their absence, and at least one person is in rare form at every gathering. Awww, joy to the world.

I guess that's why I actually noticed this bit on Salon's Table Talk about a non-dysfunctional family. Or at least a family that loves each other and likes each other. Because it got me to wondering: Is dysfunctional just the standard nowadays? Have we learned to survive past romantic visions of what family and holidays should be by becoming acutely aware of the failings of our own brood? If the majority of people come from painful homes filled with difficult people, then maybe it's more normal to find family hard than it is to find solace in our flesh and blood. I would be shocked if family now was so vastly different than family in times past, so what's changed is our perspective. Is it true that most people come from a broken place, and does knowing that help? Or do we just expect too much from the ones we love?

Single Moms By Choice Get Flack

Kelly Mills — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:30:00 GMT

Someone I know recently told me she's decided to try and have a baby. She's single and nearing the end of her fertility window, and she has always wanted children. She came to the realization that at this point, it's unlikely she's going to meet the right guy, fall in love, get married, and get knocked up in enough time to still be physically able to have kids, and that's important to her. My reaction was total delight because I think she's gonna be a great mom. So when I saw that Louise Sloan wrote a funny guide to becoming a single mom, I thought, "Great! It's about time someone did." But apparently many other folks don't feel the same way.

When Sloan was interviewed by Salon a couple weeks ago, many commenters criticized her decision to procreate solo. I'd be leery of saying comments on any site represent prevailing opinions, but I suppose there are people out there who think this is a bad thing, and maybe some of you are in that number. I have to tell you I don't really understand most of the criticisms. Some folks say Sloan is having a kid for selfish reasons, because she "wants" one. Um, you mean, unlike us two-parent households? Right, we had kids to keep the gene pool fresh or something. Others responded that kids need two parents. You know, I actually think kids probably need a whole network of people, and families need social support. My child is being raised by three adults (my sister lives with us) and it's a sweet set up. But that doesn't mean I believe y'all should have to move in with your siblings. It is possible to create social networks (thank god) and I know some isolated two-parent families that get less in the way of help than some of the single parents I know.

Sloan was also criticized because her child will someday wonder about his biological father. Yeah, I know plenty of people who are well-acquainted with their biological parents and kind of wish they weren't. Maybe if we don't treat single moms as pariahs, these kids won't have to feel like their situation is somehow abnormal or lacking. Oh, and I don't think kids need a dad (many lesbian moms doing just fine, thanks) or a mom (same goes for male gay couples raising kids); I think they need good grown-ups who love them and care for them. That's more than many people get, and with that love and protection and care, the kids will be just fine.

What do you think?

Working Mom Woes: Another Study, More Venom

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:32:00 GMT

A recent British study reveals non-breeder people resent the hell out of working moms (not dads, mind you) and all their sick time, maternity leave, kid-meeting-going ways. Or so it appears at first glance. Over at Broadsheet, Carol Lloyd rightly points out that "...it's a shame that this survey almost exclusively nabs headlines as a catfight in the making because a couple of its findings are truly disturbing."

Nevertheless, I still don't understand why everyone is so bent out of shape about people taking time off to care for family members (small, innocent, cute ones even)?? Perhaps someone can explain it to me....

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that working mamas get their unfair share of heat. Whether we choose to work or not, or stay home or not, there is no escaping the Eye of Sauron watching our every move. So how is it that we're given a hard time when the kids have strep throat, or a fever, or a cold, or an appointment (God forbid) at the dentist. Is it so difficult to understand that employers remain inflexible at their own peril?

Workplace inflexibility pits people against each other (men against women, breeders against non-breeders, bosses against employees). We end up fighting like rats in a cage and missing the main point. At some point, everyone will need workplace flexibility, even if they don't have children. We should drop this warring and start trying to make the system better for all concerned.

Embryo Culture and The Ethics of Assisted Reproduction

Jessica Ashley (Sassafrass) — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:27:00 GMT

I probably wouldn't have read Embryo Culture, a new book on ethics inside a test tube nation, until I read this interview on Salon with author Beth Kohl. I was surprised at how engaging she was and how connected I felt to the reproductive, political and spiritual journey she went on while becoming a mother. It reminded me of a very clear moment when the worlds of assisted reproduction and doing it the old-fashioned way collided on Thursday morning in another mother's living room.

I was sitting in playgroup one week when two of the mommies were talking IVF treatments. I was fascinated and humbled by all they were going through physically and otherwise, by the insider language of IVF and by their very different experiences. I've been privy to many of these conversations simply because I know a lot of women who've turned to assisted reproduction to have biological children. I could very well be one of those women, but I am not.

One of the mommies turned to me and asked how long we tried to conceive before the seeds of Lil E took root. I told her the truth, that to my own surprise, it only took one try.

"Bitch!" she laughed. But it wasn't funny and she wasn't really joking around about whatever physiological or genetic or environmental or just plain old stupid luck got me knocked up on the first go and landed her in a long line at a fertility clinic to get shots at 7 a.m. with 75 other women.

The reason my husband and I decided to go ahead and give pregnancy a try was because a close friend and co-worker had been into the depths of many kinds of shots, procedures, miscarriages and attempts at making a baby that lasted years before she finally had a "successful" pregnancy. It scared me and it scared another close friend and co-worker who also got pregnant on the first try. It felt like a strange twist that our friend's state of well-being and marriage were so battered by infertility and that each of us reacted by quickly getting pregnant.

All of this back story that led to my pregnancy and then future friendships with women engaged in the real work of reproduction has played into my politics. I have been pro-choice as long as I can remember. I grew up in a household where we were not allowed to buy products or pizza by companies that in turn gave money to anti-choice organizations. As my belly grew and from it, emerged a human being, because of whom I met women struggling with what to do with frozen embryos and the possibility of selective abortion, I became even more invested in the freedom for women to make all kinds of reproductive choices. I understand now, though, that it is even deeper and more emotional and more spiritual than a sign scrawled with Sharpie slogans or an issue to check off on a voting ballot or click off in an email of protest to my local representatives.

One thing I see clearer now is that although we may go about becoming and being parents quite differently, we are not divided by the people who conceive in the back of a Suburu Outback and those who do it in stirrups in their doctor's office, those who are filling out applications for adoption and those who are making the very tough decision to have an abortion, those who are holding on to embryos until they can donate them to science and those who are choosing not to pay thousands of dollars to keep them frozen and ferried away, bitches who got pregnant immediately and those who didn't.

I'm not going to say I completely understand each experience or choice; they are not all mine. But I do think we are linked in the reproductive choices we are making simply by making the choices. I don't imagine that every single person does, but I imagine that most people do invest themselves psychologically, spiritually and emotionally as well as physically when they try to become parents. And that is the place where I think there is so much room for conversation, activism and exploration. After all, many of us could easily slide from one category to the next, from fertile to infertile or the other way around in the blink of an eye, slip of an egg or prick of a needle. Beyond the science and reasoning of that possibility, is, as Kohl says, the question of not what we can do but if we do it. And that is a deep well I think we've only just begun to dive into.

Skinny Jeans Curse Our Daughters

Kelly Mills — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:33:00 GMT

I'd take the rack or thumbscrews over skinny jeans any day. By skinny jeans I mean that denim instrument of self-flagellation some of us keep around and try on from time to time in the vain hope we'll be able to fit into that unmaintainable size, a size we were once however many years ago. In this bit, the author gets a new twist on the skinny jean mind-f*ck, when she squeezes her one-year-old into a pair of pants that were just not designed to accommodate the squishy goodness of a toddler. Aside from the whole issue of mini-adult clothes passing for kid outfits today, the skinny jeans became a reminder of the total nuttiness our girls get about weight and body image and all that. Long live the comfy pants.

Before my kid was born, I lived in fear that I'd pass on my own body-loathing to her. I believed I had to learn to accept every lump and curve of my physique in order to spare her a lifetime of messed-up eating and mirror scrutiny. But while I did not manage to accomplish complete self-acceptance before her arrival, a nice thing has come to pass. When I look at her plump thighs and muscle-y calves, I think they are the most beautiful thing ever. And since she got those from me, I get to turn it around a little. Maybe it's ass-backwards, but it works. And for the record, she's a big fan of elastic waistbands, so there you have it. Not a single pair of skinny jeans in the closet. Yet.

The Bad News: Annie's Mac Ain't All That. There's No Good News.

Patti — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:13:00 GMT

Five bucks says that you, dear reader, will be preparing a box of Annie's macaroni and cheese for your little darlings' lunch or dinner at some point within the next week. And while you may feel some tiny pang of guilt that it's from a box, you probably feel better that it isn't Kraft. Because Annie's is natural, right? It's natural and therefore it is better for your child. Even the most foodie of my friends have a box of Annie's in the pantry for "just in case", because it's better than the alternative quickie dinner, isn't it?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but someone has to be: You are wrong. I'm wrong. We are all wrong. Salon's exposé of the un-goodness of Annie's Macaroni and Cheese proves that it's no better than its mainstream competitors.

Furthermore, Annie's Homegrown, as a company, is not above the same marketing tactics that the big boys use to lure your child into believing that they not only need Annie's pasta, they also need Annie's crackers, Annie's grahams, and Annie's canned pasta meals (which taste like ASS, so you won't get lured by them twice, believe me). They've got their little bunny character, they've got their marketing tie-in with the cast of PBS' Arthur, they've got their whole ecologically friendly schtick that parents like us just buy right into, as though the cheerful reminder on the box to "please recycle me!" makes it somehow better than boxes that don't treat us like morons.

As Anastacia Marx de Salcedo points out, we're suckers. It really is just as easy to whip up a homemade mac and cheese that's better than anything that comes in a box, whether it be a blue box or a purple one. How the hell have we forgotten this? How did a generation of smart, label-reading, skeptical consumers get suckered into being the type of parents who cry tears of joy when they discover that Annie's Shells & Cheese can be purchased by the case at Costco? And when the obvious is pointed out to us, or at least to me...why do I feel so cheated?