Strollerderby : daughters

Kid's Hair Chewing Almost Kills Her

JeanneSager — Tue, 26 May 2009 16:01:00 GMT

That's it. I'm scheduling a haircut for my daughter.

After years of pulling it out of her mouth and saying "don't chew on your hair," I read this: a five-year-old in England swallowed so much of her own hair that it formed a rope that was constricting her organs.

Yes, her hair almost killed her.

Yum. Is it bad to say I chuckled a little at the fact that they called this Rapunzel syndrome (Rapunzel, Rapunzel, poop out your hair)? Come on, she survived! The tot, Millie Wallis, was suffereing from stomach aches for months, and visits to the doctor and hospital turned up nothing for half a year. Finally an "internal scan" revealed a large foreign object in her stomach. They thought it was a tumor until they went in and found the rope of hair, stretching from the stomach down farther in the digestive tract, cutting through her bowel.

It's a worst case scenario, I know. But it's none too pleasant pulling hairs out of your kid's butt because they've swallowed them and they're just sort of hanging out there (sorry for the TMI), so my warning still stands - let them eat cake . . . not hair.

Image: Daily Mail

via Jezebel

Ten of the Best Lines from Kiddie Lit

Dad Charges Daughter With Grand Theft Auto

Brett Singer — Fri, 22 May 2009 21:00:00 GMT

A girl in Fort Lauderdale, Florida took her dad's car while he was visiting her much younger sibling (19 months old) at the hospital. She's 12. She drove around without the headlights on and hit a police car.

Her dad isn't messing around. He asked police to charge his daughter with grand theft auto. Not the video game -- the crime.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, this is the second time the girl has stolen her dad's car, according to the AP. On the other hand, it's your daughter. Do you really want her to rot in jail? Is that likely to help?

Something similar happened on 'Gossip Girl' this season. (Yes! I know. You think I'm nuts. Stay with me for a moment.) Lillian Van der Woodsen gives her daughter Serena an expensive bracelet, which is a family heirloom. Then, when Serena does something Lily doesn't like (it's not worth explaining what that was), she calls the police and tells them Serena stole the bracelet. Serena goes to jail. Not exactly the same situation of course, but similar enough. Choosing whether or not to send my kid to jail is a choice I hope I never have to make.

(Side note: what the heck is in the water in Florida? Crazy juice?)

What would you do if your kid were a repeat offender? Turn them over to the police or try something else?

Source: AP via Fox News

Image: SXC

13 Year Old Alfie Definitely Not A Dad

Not Every Kid With a Mother Has a "Mommy"

Baby Asleep On Dad's Head

10 Year Old Burned By Tanning Bed

Colbert to Food Movement Guy: Yes, But Were YOU Breastfed?

Single Mom Sells Ad Space On Her Body on eBay

Is it a Lucky Boy Who Dates Obama's Daughter?

JeanneSager — Thu, 21 May 2009 17:24:00 GMT

The president is nervous.

Not about the economy (well, probably) or swine flu (OK, maybe that too).

But President Barack Obama is a dad after all, and he can't help but think about what will happen when daughters Sasha and Malia start dating.

Can you blame him? I wrote a piece a few months ago about Jamie Foxx stressing about his daughter dating and earned a ration of comments about my need to buy into patriarchical nonsense. But come on, folks, dads worry about their daughters. Heck, I worry about my daughter!

So why is it so inappropriate for dads to stress about the day their daughter brings a boy home?

The president told a reporter recently, "dating I think will be an issue because I have men with guns surrounding them at all times, which I'm perfectly happy with, but they may feel differently about it."

He was laughing when we said it, and minus the guns, I can her it coming out of the mouth of almost any dad I know. Those poor, poor prospective suitors.

Dating is a fun time for kids, but with hormones high on both sides, it's wrought with challenges. Broken hearts. Nights spent crying in bed because he didn't call when he said he would (and it doesn't make it much better that he simply forgot because that's what teenagers DO!). It isn't just a "Ohmigod, sex," thought that runs through a parents' mind when they think about their kids dating. We don't want them to get hurt.

And yeah, there's the sex thing too. None of us want to be grandparents tomorrow. And we remember what it's like to be in lust, right? We can't tell our kids WHEN to have sex, how or where. But we can worry about protecting their hearts and their bodies.

And let's face it, dads with daughters have an especial worry chiefly because they know what HE is thinking (or at least have an inkling of it). When my husband gets a look on his face about our daughter's little boyfriends, I don't worry that he's spending too much time thinking up ways to exert his patriarchical thumb over her femininity. He's just a dad who doesn't want his daughter to get hurt.

He may not be surrounded by guys with guns and access to his FBI file, but let me put it this way - the boy who messes with our daughter is no luckier than the boy who has to come face to face with the leader of the free world on prom night.

Image: DenverPost

What Burlesque Can Teach Your Daughter

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 01 May 2009 21:00:00 GMT

Burlesque is not the first thing that comes to mind when I consider how to impart healthy self-esteem to girls. But Deirdre Timmons, the director of A Wink and a Smile—a new documentary about the resurgence of burlesque—thinks her 12-year-old’s exposure to burlesque has helped her have "no body image issues whatsoever." As she recently told Halogen Life, "I'd like to think it has a healthy impact on her being around on these women who are comfortable with their bodies."

Timmons was originally drawn to burlesque as a documentary subject in large part because of its deviation from mainstream standards of beauty. She says, “I think a lot of women started to see burlesque happening and thinking, ‘That’s my body up there. That woman is my age, and I thought I was supposed to stop being glamorous and sexy.’”

As part of her work for the film, 42-year-old Timmons studied and performed burlesque herself, which meant that her daughter became very familiar with the medium. “When I was learning how to dance myself,” Timmons said, “I was making my daughter write down the choreography, and I’d be like, ‘Should I bump here or grind here? Which way are my tassels twirling?’”

Depending on Timmons’ routine (I’m assuming she chose not to share a super risqué, striptease-type number with her daughter), that sounds to me like a wonderful mother-daughter bonding experience. Burlesque aside, it can only be beneficial for daughters to see their mothers fully devoted to and fulfilled by their work—particularly when the mother allows her children to share in her work life.

Not being an avid burlesque connoisseur myself, I can’t make a final judgment on its abilities to empower women. But judging from the movie trailer below (NSFW), the women interviewed certainly seem to be interested in burlesque for reasons I fully support: self-confidence, enjoyment, and embracing their eccentricities no matter what other people think.

Still, burlesque is about sex appeal—it’s wonderful for kids to know that rhythm, stage presence, and talent are not dependent upon having a certain kind of body, but you certainly wouldn’t want your daughter coming home with a feather boa and sequined underwear.

Judging from this trailer, would you let your teens or preteens see this movie?

Photo: Halogen Life

They Say: Kids Who Watch Adult TV Have Sex Earlier

Ben Affleck Suffers Same Fate As Dads of Daughters Everywhere

JeanneSager — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:07:00 GMT

Jennifer Garner says she can always tell when husband Ben Affleck was left to his own devices with daughter Violet's hair. It comes out looking like a rat's nest.

Hey dads, sound familiar?

“You can always tell when he has been at it, just two random barrettes hanging in there. It’s so sweet," Garner told InStyle.

She could have been talking about my husband. He was over the moon when I gave birth to a little girl (which - despite us not finding out prior to delivery - he just "knew" was going to happen), but when she started sprouting enough hair to require clippies and ponytail holders, he was lost.

"It doesn't ever do what I want it to do," he tells me. "I just don't have the patience for it." This coming from a guy who once had hair past his shoulders. But his was super fine, super straight hair, hair that never needed to be brushed out with no more tangles spray after a night of rolling around on a crib mattress, hair that never needed to be secured in two little braids hanging down his back.

Some guys get hair and are perfectly adept at handling their daughter's locks. More are like my husband - facing a major learning curve after years of just not caring what their head looks like (because after years of long hair, his is now shaved in a Marine-like buzz - he does nothing more than shampoo daily). In our house it's particularly funny because it's the bald mother who has been showing Dad the ropes, teaching him about where on the head to place a ponytail (Not too high, this isn't the eighties. Not too low - she isn't an aging hippie) and how to brush out tangles without yanking on the scalp.

I'll give credit where credit is due. He tries. If he's the parent getting her ready for the day, her hair is at least brushed, albeit with a clip stuck at a random angle - kind of like Violet Affleck's.

Dads, did you jump over the curve after your daughters were born or do you turn out girls who sport the ragamuffin look in the morning?

Image: TheInsider

Don't Call Her a Tomboy

JeanneSager — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:36:00 GMT

Ask anyone of our generation what a tomboy is, and as forward-thinking as we might be, you'll get a gender-bending answer. Ask our kids, and you might just get a funny look.

It seems the word tomboy is disappearing, or at least the negative connotation that came with it when we were kids.

Years ago a girl who preferred her t-shirts to tutus and her knees skinned and dirty would bring out all the old biddies in the neighborhood to cluck and shake their fingers. The "l-word" was whispered by parents late at night, and I don't mean love.

It wasn't PC or, for that matter, very fair. Neither is the dictionary definition: "an energetic, sometimes boisterous girl whose behavior and pursuits, esp. in games and sports, are considered more typical of boys than of girls."

But according to an in-depth look at the tomboy label in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, girls who don't want to act all "girly," are getting a little more respect these days. Basically, girls are just that - girls. And if they're girls who like to skateboard, girls who climb trees (as long as their parents don't catch them) and girls who prefer getting muddy, it's OK - they don't need an extra title. They're still, well, girls.

Marketers might not have it figured out yet - I'm still waiting for mud and bugs Barbie - but the girls have. Maybe that's because so have we. I never would have thought to call my daughter a tomboy; even though I most definitely was (and I'm not ashamed of that). Part of it is because she loves her pink clothes, her tutus and her sparkle clippies, and nothing I've done has changed her tastes. Sigh. But when she tears across the backyard to tackle her friend Chase, I just see two kids playing. It took my godmother, who is in her late fifties, early sixties, to even alert me to the fact that my daughter isn't as "girly" as some. "She's a tomboy," she told me the other day, watching my daughter and Chase outside on the swingset. "She's unique."

The former didn't bother me, but the latter I appreciated more. Yes, that's right, she's unique. She's different. She doesn't have to do everything one way because she's a girl. She just does . . . whatever.

Explains Kristen Tillotson in the Star-Tribune:

The consensus: Girls feel more pressure to look good than boys -- but not necessarily all pink and lacy. They still have more responsibilities around the house, such as helping with cooking and cleaning, than their brothers do. They also have a lot of chutzpah and ambition.

I doubt the pressure to look good will ever go away. Whether you want to look good for a guy, a girl or even just to feel more comfortable in your own skin, a portion of that is intrinsic in feminity - in part because our bodies change so drastically during adolescence. The difference between responsibilities in the household between the genders is still up to parents; although I'd wager that even that is changing. But if it's the sister who prefers cutting the lawn to helping to cook dinner, at least she might never hear she's doing the man's job when there's woman's work to be done.

Image: SagerScenes

Sisters Better than Brothers? We Have Proof

JeanneSager — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:22:00 GMT

Finally, a study proves what sisters everywhere have always known - our brothers are so lucky to have us!

It turns out people who grew up with sisters are more likely to be happy and emotionally settled than anyone else. Those of us stuck with, er, who grew up with, brothers, received a "less positive affect."

Psychologists at the University of Ulster and De Monfort University studied five hundred seventy-one people, ages seventeen to twenty-five to develop their theory. The subjects included people who had only brothers or only sister, people who had both and only children.

The people who had a sister - whether it was just one or many, and regardless of whether they had brothers too - were happier and more ambitious than their counterparts. Overall, those who received the lowest scores on the British psychologists' tests were men who grew up with only brothers!

So why should parents of little girls be thanking their lucky stars?

Researcher Tony Cassidy, of the University of Ulster, told the Daily Mail, "Our explanation for it is that the presence of girls opens up channels of communication and it becomes a much more expressive situation and that's positive. Emotional expression is fundamental to good psychological health and having sisters promotes this in families."

As a big sister who always begged for a little sister, and ended up with a brother instead, I can tell you brothers aren't all that bad. But then again, I don't know what it's like to have a sister, and my daughter is a one and only - so I won't see it happening in my household.

But if you're planning on having more kids, maybe you should be shooting for a girl? Better yet - have two girls, so both get the benefits! And if you throw a boy in there, well, the more the merrier.

Via Jezebel

Image: Amazon

Not Another Tween Beauty Crisis

JeanneSager — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:26:00 GMT

Want to know if another generation of kids is headed for holy hellfire? According to Salon's Broadsheet, just check out Newsweek.

Broadsheet's Amy Benfer has pulled Newsweek articles from now, the late nineties, early nineties and the eighties that all say the same thing: today's tween girls are growing up too fast, they're skankier than the previous generation of tween girls, they know too much about naughty things, aaaack. Avert your eyes!

What prompted the rant? A Newsweek article on Generation Diva, a comment on the trainwreck that is TLC's Toddlers and Tiaras that attempts to define the new normal as "a generation that primps and dyes and pulls and shapes, younger and with more vigor."

Author Jessica Bennett says, "Girls today are salon vets before they enter elementary school. Forget having mom trim your bangs, fourth graders are in the market for lush $50 haircuts; by the time they hit high school, $150 highlights are standard. Five-year-olds have spa days and pedicure parties. And instead of shaving their legs the old-fashioned way—with a 99-cent drugstore razor—teens get laser hair removal, the most common cosmetic procedure of that age group."

First thing Broadsheet's Benfer points out is exactly what I thought when reading the article - how many parents have the money for $50 haircuts for themselves, not to mention their kids? Granted, I'm now bald, but even before that, my haircuts have always been under $20. Throw in an occasional eyebrow wax (which, yes, is a luxury that I have clung to more as a mom who needs SOMETHING of my own), and we're still under $30 - with tip. My daughter, meanwhile, has had two haircuts in her three, almost four, years of life: one when she was under a year to cut the dark colored newborn tips off the ingrowing blonde baby hair, the second to clean up her own "fix it" job to her hair.

Frankly - I don't see a problem with having taken her to a salon.Technically, neither cut cost us a dime because the hairdresser was a close friend, but I would have paid (tried to pay) to have my daughter's hair cut by a professional - in part so I could do the mom thing and take pictures of her first cut and in part so I didn't have to hold her still, concentrate on cutting in straight lines, make something out of the mess she'd made. It was WORTH IT to me to take her to a salon instead of doing it myself. Does that mean I've set her up to put beauty above brains or made her vain? Nonsense!

She gets her toenails painted too - usually by my mother, who delights in their at home girls night bonding sessions. I guess that's technically a pedicure party, but is that really that bad either? I loved having my toenails painted when I was her age too - by my babysitter, who ironically now owns her own nail salon - and if you'll remember, I'm the mom who shaved her head . . . I'm hardly your beauty-obsessed airhead.

Which is the real issue here - how a mother looks at beauty. If she's struggling in this economy and pulling out $150 for highlights, she's the monster creating a monster. If she's putting her kid on Toddlers and Tiaras, she's just a plain old monster.

But if she's letting her three-year-old wear nail polish because it's sparkly, and she just wants to sparkle . . . she's letting kids be kids.

Image: Amazon (read it - it's hilarious)

Why It's Not Too Late to Say What You Should Have Said . . .

JeanneSager — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:49:00 GMT

I was not the mom who sat down and wrote out her feelings during her pregnancy in a record book for her child to look back on twenty-one years down the line. Thank God - I was a miserable pregnant woman.

But almost four years on, reading a host of letters from mothers to daughters in the Times of London, I decided maybe it's time. Before the pre-teen hormones set in and my daughter and I are at odds with each other. Before she starts slamming doors and I start debating whether my gray hair is from age or stress.

The letters are not strictly mother to daughter; there's aunt to niece in there, along with memories of advice given by mothers long ago. But it's hard to read them without wanting to write something, anything, that will one day be read and bring the happy sort of tears to my daughter's eyes that these letters written by strangers brought to mine.

Because these are the true keepsakes - not the huge scrapbooks some parents spend hours every week perfecting (more power to you honey, but that's just not me). We all have a letter somewhere, written by someone special at some time - a note from a high school boyfriend in his chicken scratch handwriting, a carefully penned missive from one grandparent to another. They talk about the lost art of handwriting, and it's true - I hardly see e-mails printed out and kept in a closet somewhere. Letters though, they last.

And so, while I hope to be very much alive when my own daughter is twenty-one, I think it's time I write a letter . . . or maybe two or three. In my own chicken scratch. About the girl she is and the girl I know she'll be. The girl I love today and will love even more tomorrow.

Go read the letters at the Times . . . then go write your own.

Image:

Husband Loses Job, Wife Loses Respect For Him

Brett Singer — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:00:00 GMT

We all know how tough it is out there. The number of jobs is shrinking by the day, and layoffs are common. Many families still follow the traditional model where the husband is the breadwinner and the wife takes care of the children and housekeeping duties. Nothing wrong with that. But let's say dad loses his job. He didn't quit because he missed out on a promotion, nor was he fired for making photocopies of his butt. He was laid off. It happens. Mom should be supportive, right? Flexible. Do what needs to be done to keep the family together.

Well, yes. Of course. But in the case of this couple that was profiled on ABC's Good Morning America, wifey has lost respect for her fella. She's not attracted to him anymore. In fact, they are sleeping in separate beds.

The wife in question, Eleanor Hemmert, had this to say about her husband Rick: "It's the respect. I wish I could say something different, but I've lost so much respect for him. And I think the dynamics with a man and a woman is a woman has to respect her husband. And if she doesn't, that relationship just goes away."

In an illustration of what I meant when I questioned a passage from Kate Gosselin's book, Eleanor also said: "That's one of the basic things that little girls grow up thinking - that the man is going to put the roof over her head, he is going to support the family." And when it doesn't happen, you get angry. Expectations can be bad when the person is inflexible.

I'm not in their marriage, so I don't know what else is going on. But this couple chose to put themselves on TV, so I'm commenting. Anytime I hear a woman complain that her husband isn't doing the manly work that she expects her man to be doing, it really irks me. If a woman were told to stay home and get pregnant, and that her place was in the kitchen, preferably barefoot, would she like that? Or that it was perfectly reasonable to pay her less money than a man who does the same job? Granted, those things happen all the time. But they're wrong. So is this woman's attitude.

Of course, Husband Rick isn't helping matters. "I think it is in every man's DNA to be the breadwinner. It's very humbling for me. It changes the dynamic of our relationship immensely. There is a wedge that has appeared. I feel the anger. I feel the tension. This house is not as joyous as it should be."

See, that's a choice. It's not in any man's "DNA" that he has "to be the breadwinner." It's in his mind, and the mind of his wife. Sometimes things change. Is it unpleasant? Sure. Is it worth ruining your marriage for? No way.

I understand that it's probably very frustrating for any couple when the primary breadwinner loses their job. But it's not like Mr. Man decided to quit being a salesman in order to pursue his dream of being a rodeo clown. Wife Eleanor is also complaining that she has to work more hours now, and that Rick cooks dinner poorly. But is that really fair? If he's just sitting around the house all day with his feet up, I can see being annoyed about that. But that's different from being so furious about something that was outside of you and your husband's control that you can't even sleep in the same room anymore.

Their daughter Elizabeth is "picking up" the tension between mom and dad. While both husband and wife are angry at each other and feel "underappreciated", their daughter is "suffering silently," says ABC News. "If the kids sense that you are unhappy and you don't talk to them about it, they may incorrectly blame themselves," they say. Good advice. Maybe the Hemmerts will take it.

Source: ABC News

Morning News - iPhone Gets Feature Other Phones Already Have

UPDATE - Josef Fritzl Sentenced To Life In Psychiatric Institution

Kate Gosselin Dreamt Of A Husband and Children - Did You?

They Say - Older Fathers Spawn Dumber Kids

GMA Tweets Details On Levi Johnston And Son

4 Year Old Brings Pot To School, School Bans Backpacks

Oprah Gets It Right On Chris Brown

UPDATE - Josef Fritzl Sentenced To Life In Psychiatric Institution

Brett Singer — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 01:35:00 GMT

UPDATE: Josef Fritzl has been sentenced to life in a psychiatric institution. While onthe surface this seems like justice has been served, The Scotsman says that the ruling means he could be free in 15 years if a doctor says he's been cured of whatever they decide is wrong with him. Basically, Fritzl is eligible for parole in 15 years. It's not a big chance, but it could happen. Which would be bad. The Scotsman's Stephen McGinty does say that, "It is likely...that [Fritzl] will die in prison," since he is 73 years old.

Earlier posts follow.

*-*-*-*-*

Josef Fritzl's daughter Elisabeth testified against him on Tuesday, according to CNN. Thankfully, it was by videotape. Elisabeth and the children she had as a result of her father's abuse are living in an undisclosed location with new identities.

How do you go on after something like that? I'm amazed and oddly impressed that Elisabeth has the strength to go on living, much less testify against her father. Of course, I imagine she would like nothing more than to see him go to prison for the rest of his life.

The case has become a major media event in Austria, with crowds gathering in and out of the courtroom. Press has been barred from certain parts of the trial, including Elisabeth's testimony.

*-*-*-*-*

CNN is reporting that Josef Fritzl will plead guilty to rape and incest on Monday. He will not plead guilty to charges of "murder, enslavement and assault." Fritzl's lawyer says that his client "expects to spend the rest of his life in prison." Um, yeah, that sounds right. That said, the charges he's pleading guilty to carry relatively short prison terms -- five to fifteen years for rape, one year for incest. The biggest is the murder charge, which, as discussed below, some experts think will be tough to prove. I guess it's a good thing that Fritzl will definitely be found guilty of something, although if he goes to jail for only a couple of years, that would be tragic.

Original post follows.

*-*-*-*-*-*

Josef Fritzl, the man who kept his daughter locked in the basement for more than 20 years and impregnated her multiple times, is finally going on trial.

Disturbingly, he may spend only 15 years in jail. Or less.

According to London's Times Online, the "Austrian incest monster" is about to stand trial for "murder, incest, unlawful imprisonment and enslavement." Fritzl thinks that he could receive less than 10 years in prison.

He may be right. Some lawyers feel that the murder charge, which is based on the fact that he allowed one of the children he had with his own daughter to die, won't stick. That leaves rape as the biggest charge, which under Austrian law carries a 15 year sentence. Parole, good behavior -- he could be out in five years.

I know that everyone is entitled to a defense, but the one that Fritzl and his lawyer are offering is almost as disturbing as what he did. Fritzl is "claiming that his daughter was having sex when she was barely out of her teens. She smoked. She took drugs. She drank. He wanted to save her." His lawyer, Rudolf Mayer, says of his client: "He is not a monster. He loved his daughter in his own way." The father also says that he took good care of his "captives", citing the fact that the bird he bought them lived as evidence of good air quality in their underground prison. (This is at least consistent with the insane statements he made last year.)

As a quick reminder, Fritzl kept his daughter Elisabeth in the basement, along with some of the children they had together. Three of them were allowed to live upstairs -- the "upstairs children". The cellar was equipped with soundproof walls. Elisabeth was forced to write a letter saying that she had run away and joined a cult. This was a well thought out crime. Fritzl says that he is "not normal," but that's as close as he's come to an apology.

Making matters worse, prosecutors may cut a deal that will allow Fritzl to choose the prison where he serves his short sentence. One that lets him sing in a choir and take cooking lessons. When he gets out, he wants to go back home and live with his wife.

According to the Times, many feel that this situation could have been avoided if social workers had done their jobs. That may be the case, but the idea that this monster could get off with a light jail sentence in a country club prison is horrible. Not as horrible as what he did. But it's pretty close.

Source: timesonline.co.uk

Image: BBC

Boy Finds Spider Monkey in Backyard - Video

Woman Trades Two Kids For Bird

Teen Dad's Father Wearing Halloween Mask In Public

Should These Parents Be Charged With Murder?

92-Year-Old Delivers Baby

Parents Say Hospital Took Son's Organs Without Consent

The Best and Worst of 2008

Mothers Pimping Daughters for Cash

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:31:00 GMT

A Time Magazine has a horribly depressing article on a long held Iraqi custom that only seems to be growing worse, with the country still unstable: Child sex slavery. In many cases, it's their mothers who force them into it.

Clearly the parenting books are different over there, as I have yet to see a stateside copy of "What the Expect When You're Pimping Your Daughter, You Heartless (Fill in the Blank)."

Girls as young as 11 and 12 are fetching anywhere from $2,000 to $30,000 on the "human cattle market," and oftentimes it's their mothers who are looking to score the money, according to the article.

Take the case of 15-year-old Atoor. She married her husband, 19, but when he was killed, her mother tried to sell her into prostitution. The girl told authorities, who put her in prison for two years.

"I wanted to go to prison, I didn't want to be sold," she says. "I didn't think it would happen to me. My mother used to spoil me. Yes, she sold my sisters but she regretted that. I though that she loved me."

Wasn't this one of the 5,000 reasons given for the invasion of Iraq, improving human rights? Especially women's rights? How much are we culpable for this rising trend, and do we have an obligation to make this right -- not just for girls over there but so we can look our own in the eyes and say we tried?

[photo: Time]

They Say: Girls Made of Sugar and Grit

JeanneSager — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:34:00 GMT

In case you needed another bit of ammunition to send the "girls are more delicate than boys" notion blasting into outer space, I'm happy to oblige.

It turns out girls are significantly more resilient then their male counterparts when growing up in a troubled family.

The small study (just one hundred twenty-five kids) published in this month's Journal of Adolescent Health acknowledges the odds are stacked against kids who grow up in dysfunctional homes. The girls, however, seem to have slightly better odds of triumphing - about four times that of the boys.

The conclusion of the study is one of those "duh" findings that come from a lot of social studies: "early intervention with families with opiate-dependent parents to prevent and reduce internalizing and externalizing problems in their children holds the most promise of supporting resilient adaptation in early adulthood."

In other words, help the kids when they're younger, and you'll make more of a difference. Obvious, I'd say, but then a lot of these social studies seem to be geared toward convincing those of us with a lack of common sense of the right path.

I was disappointed not to find more information that would explain why the girls fared better. As a woman, and the mother of a girl, I'd love to say that is a "no duh," conclusion too - but I'm not writing off the boys out there! So I can only posit a few conclusions from my own experience:

1. Sisters are often called on to be the "responsible" sibling in a family. Not every sister, of course, and there are often brothers who end up shouldering a much heftier burden. But in almost every case I know of adult siblings splitting familial responsibilities, the brunt of the work falls to the sister. Sisters are often expected to take up the bulk of caregiving for older parents, even if that means moving across the country while a brother lives in the same town as the parents. Perhaps this relates to the traditional role of mother (female) as caregiver?

2. Sisters tend to "mother" their brothers. Again this isn't true for every family, but in an overwhelming number of families when the going gets rough, the females tend to turn outward rather than inward. That focus on the well-being of the other family members can be a huge source of stress, and not particularly healthy for her emotionally. But it's a form of strength that powers them through - and isn't that just another way of saying they're resilient?

Of course, none of this means boys aren't "as good" or "as responsible." But then again, they're not necessarily all that strong!

Via: Los Angeles Times

Image:NC Medical Insurance

Innie or Outie, a Sign of Fertility?

JeanneSager — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:34:00 GMT

The bump or button left behind on your daughter's belly after the umbilical stump falls off could tell you whether you're destined to be a granny.

A University of Finland researcher says the belly button is more than just the cute thing your tot is showing off when she lifts up her shirt every five minutes. It's a sign of "mating potential" in fertile women.

And we just though it was there to pop out in the ninth month to tell us when the baby was done cooking!

Aki Sinkkonen at the University of Helsinki published an article this month in the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) Journal theororizing that the shape of the belly button is linked to a woman's fertility: "I suggest that the symmetry, shape, and position of umbilicus can be used to estimate the reproductive potential of fertile females, including risks of certain genetically and maternally inherited fetal anomalies."

The belly button is essentially a scar, signifying how the body reacted to the loss of the umbilical cord stump. It seems to serve no other purpose, Sinkkonen says, one of the reasons she's begun floating her theory (note, a theory, NOT a fact) about innie as fertility signal.

So here's my big question - if it's all about a woman's fertility, why do boys have belly buttons?

Image: GeoParent

Would you Cheat FOR the Kids?

JeanneSager — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:26:00 GMT

Think you've heard all the lame excuses someone will give for cheating on their spouse? Here's another:

"I'm doing it for my kids."

Say what?

This came from the lips of a friend (and by friend I really mean a chick I know, kinda sorta). Her reasoning for stepping out on her marriage is simple - he's a jerk. But they've got kids. And as far as she's concerned, kids need two parents.

So she's lining up a new Daddy before she kicks the old one to the curb. I'm not even going to touch on the self-esteem issues here (that's for a woman's issues blog, not the parenting blog).

But what does this teach your kids? That it's OK to lie? That your daughters need to have a man around at all times. . . and at all costs? The idea that a woman needs to have a man is as outdated as that old quote about fish and bicycles. So too is the idea that a single parent can't provide for a child what a couple can - or that, say, two lesbians can't provide for a child what a heterosexual couple can.

There are also lessons for kids in divorce. It's OK that things fail sometimes. You have to be honest with other people. You have to be honest with yourself. But cheating on a spouse is a big no no, and somehow I can't see how the kids won't find out when they realize their new "Dad" was in Mom's life long before the divorce became finalized.

I suppose there's merit to the fact that kids fare better with two parents . . . I suppose. I am not bashing single parents or their offspring (President Obama, hello?). But for mom it's certainly easier when there's a second set of hands around. Still, with Dad the jerk around, she's obviously not having an easy go of it. Couldn't that mean single parenting might be easier?

Is single parenting that scary? As a happily - and luckily - married woman, I don't know. But I wonder what the single parents who read Babble think. You were scared right, but this scared?

Image: Everyday Citizen

Michelle Obama Objects to Sasha and Malia Dolls

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 21:30:00 GMT

If you were one of the many skeptics who aren’t buying the Ty company's claims that their recently released dolls--Sweet Sasha and Marvelous Malia--have nothing to do with President Obama’s daughters, you’re in good company.

Michelle Obama has objected to the Ty company’s thinly veiled exploitation of her daughters. According to a spokesperson for the first lady, Michelle believes "it is inappropriate to use young private citizens for marketing purposes.” Bravo!

Michelle didn’t add (nor did she need to) that she’d hardly be flattered to have her daughters represented in the TyGirlz line, which includes Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and Paris Hilton.

Photo: UPI

Sasha and Malia Beanie Baby Dolls

Ty Company Discontinues Sasha and Malia Dolls

Caylee Anthony Doll, the Worst Toy Idea Ever

Smackdown: I Don’t Care If My Daughter Has Sex as a Teen

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:01:00 GMT

Progressive, feminist, supposedly sex-positive parents are, of course, pretty well united against the absurd excesses of abstinence-only education and the religious no-sex-until-marriage frenzy.

What continues to amaze me though, is how little the positions they do take really vary from the underlying values of the abstinence worshippers.

As a parent, I keep running into a nudge, nudge, wink, wink understanding that even though we know it’s not good to base policy on it, of course really we all want to put off our daughters’ sexual awakenings as long as possible (or at least until they’re out of the house). There are jokes about chastity belts and not letting boyfriends come over until age 30. Every once and a while I feel the urge to get out a calendar and check the year.

I confess that I don’t get it. Not a smidgen. (And neither, for the record, does her father.) I don’t think this is just a matter of my having a defective freak-out gene. I really think that this attitude is not in our daughters’ best interests.

Concerned and thoughtful parents like my colleague Shannon, argue that it’s not really about the squick factor. They think it’s important for their daughters to put off the confusion and emotional drama of sexual relationships in order to get solid in forming their own identities, to make sure that they don’t get distracted by serving other’s needs first.

It sounds good at first, but I have to disagree. It’s not sex that hampers girls’ development, sense of self, or progress toward a career. It’s negative, hysterical, sexist attitudes about sex. (And the unintended pregnancies, abusive relationships, etc. that follow.)

The self-esteem argument is really the religious right’s argument minus the God and marriage specifics. It says this: “Sex is such a god-awful big deal that it will necessarily consume you when it happens and so you must wait for some future time at which you will miraculously be able to handle it.”

I don’t buy it. Sex is a powerful force, sure, but we have a fair amount of control over how much power we really give it. Making it something dangerous to your very identity gives it just as much power as making it central to your very identity.

I think this attitude is partly to blame for teens continuing to mistake sex for love. It also still places far too much emphasis on the importance of the “first time,” leaving girls (and women) feeling attached to first lovers who don’t deserve a third glance (or feeling like failures for choosing a less-than-perfect first lover).

In its usual gender-specific form, this attitude also perpetuates the idea that girls can’t really want sex for their own reasons, that they must be succumbing to the media hype and trying to please someone else and they will automatically lose their sense of self in a sexual relationship.

(Yes, clearly, far too many girls are getting pushed into sex they don’t want. But telling them they should never say yes does not help teach them when/how to say no.)

Of course I also have to wonder why, if people think sex is such an overwhelming cognitive thing to get started at, the conclusion they draw from that is that it’s a good idea to put it off until kids leave the nest and are distanced from familial support systems and previous friends, have easier access to alcohol, are first learning to live on their own, and are facing academic and/or job pressure. Or, for that matter, until they are 30, feeling their biological clocks and suffering pressure (internal and external) to find “the one” and settle down.

Obviously I wouldn’t argue that everyone ought to start having sex in high school. “Ready” is a super complex and individual cocktail (and takes two). Not everyone over 18 or 20 is ready. Not everyone younger isn’t. But high-school does have some potential advantages: financial security, parental backup if needed, and some extra time to be processing, daydreaming (or angstfully writing in a journal). That could all actually form a safer place to experiment than newly adrift in the “real world.”

Of course we all use our own experience as a touchstone. I starting “fooling around” at 15 and having sex at 17 with someone trustworthy I’d been dating for many months and who served, as good friends and partners do, to help me learn more about myself as well as how to have a relationship. I made out with a jerk or two in there first and lived to tell the tale with my self-esteem intact. In fact, those early experiences gave me a very clear and relatively safe tutorial in the difference between attraction and love, flirtation and friendship, passion and trust that has served me well.

If my daughter has the chance to do the same—armed with the facts to protect herself and the solid knowledge that her worth doesn’t depend on her choosing one way or the other—it won’t bother me in the slightest.

Photo by Made Underground, via Flickr.

The Other Side:

Smackdown: Sex Before Twenty? Hopefully Not My Kids

More by this author:

Smackdown: Aw, Just Let Her Have a Barbie

JeanneSager — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:27:00 GMT

I used to be on the other side of this Smackdown. Bimbo Barbie wasn't prancing into my house, no way, no how.

Then came Christmas. And Santa at the firehouse. And kindly volunteers in the ladies auxiliary who put a lot of time and effort into being good neighbors and buying goodies for all the little kiddies in my neighborhood.

Damn them.

Because the moment my daughter opened mermaid Barbie (who my gay best friend promptly told her must be named Ariel), she was a kid transformed. "Barbie, Mommy, look, I got a Barbie from Santa!"

I didn't even know she knew who Barbie was. She spent hours that night, ripping Barbie's clothes off. Making me put them back on. Ripping Barbie's clothes off. Making Daddy put them back on. Brushing Barbie's hair. Tangling Barbie's brush in knots in Barbie's hair. It didn't matter what I thought. Barbie had found a home.

She's now up to three Barbies - all gifts - and I've given up on a lot of my feministic outrage. It's a doll. She has impossibly big boobs and an impossibly small waist. But she's hardly the only doll to be lacking in realism.

My daughter's favorite educational doll, the Learn to Play Emma from International Playthings, has a ginormous head, big bulbous feet and a squarish body. No one's picking on her lack of realism, however, because she's A) educational and B) not overtly sexual (not sexual at all, really). But is the Barbie really all that sexual? She's got a plastic non-crotch (trust me, my little brother, as all little brothers do, cleared that one up a long time ago). She's got boobs with no nipples, and her body is made of the most uncomfortable-to-cuddle-with material known to kids.

She has skanky make-up, and skanky clothes; I'll grant you that. But by the time my daughter - or most little girls - gets done with undressing Emma (or her equivalent) and toting her naked around the grocery store, she's looking quite the skank herself. Not to mention what happens when our kids get ahold of some paint and try to put "make-up" on their dolls. They don't have to see it on their mothers; they can see it on the grocery store clerk and think it's "so pretty, Mommy!" Chances are, at some point, they'll try to recreate it on their dolls, whether her name is Barbie or not.

Also making the Barbie concern take up less and less of my time is the amount of her time spent with Barbie. By not making it a big deal, we've managed to make Barbie no more special than her collection of Hess trucks or her art easel. The three Barbies are in the toybox - usually naked - when she wants them. If she wants them. Often, she does, pulling them out as the favored toy for about an hour of fun before she sets her aside and begins begging for Play-Doh (now there, I have true toy hatred). She seems no more attuned to her own body after playing with a Barbie, no more obsessed with hair, clothes, make-up or or weight. And let's not forget the play-acting she does, the elaborate stories she makes up about Barbie going out and having fun (no dating or having sex, clean, wholesome, three-year-old stories of going to play with Mr. Cow or driving a plastic firetruck).

Can we really blame one toy for the destruction of little girls' psyches? My mother didn't buy me Barbies, and I still developed an eating disorder. My neighbor, on the other hand, who has one of the most well-adjusted tweens I've ever met (future babysitter of my daughter, right there), spent hours playing Barbies on the floor with her. That was their mom/daughter bonding time. Now a high schooler with a wide smile, she has the kind of self-assurance I envy even at my age. The Barbies don't seem to have hurt her. Maybe because what's more important are the strong female role models, the moms who are present, available and involved in their daughters' lives (as my neighbors was then and still is).

I'm not calling Barbie the pinnacle of perfect toydom, but as long as Barbie is just one toy in the box, I'm willing to just let her be.

The Other Side:

Smackdown: Barbie and the End of the World

Image: Amazon

Why Do Pacifiers Piss So Many People Off?

Mom Bugs Kid's Teddy Bear to Spy on Ex

Babble Talk: Is Ditching the Baby Monitor Child Abuse?

Obama Wants Kids To Have a Normal Life – Good Luck With That

Brett Singer — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:30:00 GMT

On a recent trip to Hawaii, the Obama family "caused a commotion" at a mall.

No! Really? What next? Floor down? Ceiling up?

Reuters describes the event as "a surreal scene -- the president-elect, daughters Malia, 7, and Sasha, 10 and family friends eating at a table at the mall watched by a crowd of onlookers and surrounded by anxious-looking Secret Service agents."

What exactly is surreal about that? Maybe it's surreal for the Obamas, but you might think at this point that they were accustomed to the attention.

The President Elect "wants to maintain some degree of normal life for his daughters. He has also said he fears becoming isolated and losing touch with the world outside the White House 'bubble,'" according to Reuters.

I think this is an admirable idea. It is also, at best, completely unrealistic. How exactly can you call a life spent with multiple bodyguards "normal"? From now on, the Obama family is American royalty. Part of that is just because of the job Dad just got, but part of it is because the entire family has captured the American imagination. I praised Bill and Hillary Clinton for keeping the press away from Chelsea. But this is different. First of all, Chelsea was older, which made it easier to ask for her privacy. Second, it was a different time. As much as the Clinton campaign and administration was heavily televised, it was nothing like it is today. Think about it – there was no YouTube. Cable news was around, but not as prevalent as it is now. And most Americans didn't have Internet access, much less broadband with 24/7 streaming video. And four billion blogs. (Ahem.)

All that is not to say that Barack and Michelle Obama shouldn't do what they can to keep their kids as grounded as they can under the circumstances. But a normal life? Eating at a mall in peace? Come on. Not gonna happen.

Source/Image: Reuters

Babble Talk: When Abominable Sounds Like Obama

Jamie Foxx: Just a Normal Dad?

Miss Piggy Wants a Bailout For Christmas

Morning News: Sunday Edition

Babble Podcast for December 15, 2008

Announce Your New Addition With Panties: Male Perspective

How Much Is Bristol Palin Getting for Her Baby Pics?

Jamie Foxx: Just a Normal Dad?

JeanneSager — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:33:00 GMT

Aww, poor Jamie Foxx. His daughter's a hottie, and they've run out of chastity belts in Hollywood.

Somebody tell me, why is it news that a father has told his teenage daughter she can't "date until she's married?" So the father's Jamie Foxx, and anything an actor or actress does makes news, but I actually heard some women talking the other day about how far over-the-top Foxx is acting with all of this.

Excuse me, ladies, but do you have a daughter?

I considered sending them to chat up my husband. He's laid down the law. No dating until her eggs have shriveled up and we don't have to worry about out-of-wedlock babies.

OK, maybe he's overreacting. Maybe just until she's 37 or so, right?

I have yet to meet the guy who comes out of the nursery with his daughter wrapped in his arms and starts talking about the day she'll take her spot on the pole at the local strip club. He's an actor people, but he's still a father. And fathers don't take kindly to their little girls (of any age) being sexed up. And if they do, we'd suggest someone rescue those girls, stat.

Image: Sify

Review: Yo Gabba Gabba! Cuts an Album

Bringing Sexy Back: Involved Dads

One in Five Teens Having Tech Sex

No, the Vagina Doesn't 'Heal Up and Close' from Disuse

JeanneSager — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:31:00 GMT

I know what it's like to feel like your vagina is broken. It's called natural childbirth people. But I don't think even women who feel like they tore from stem to stern during the big push would refer to their va-ja-jay as an open wound.

Come to think of it, after childbirth, that place isn't open for much business for awhile. Period. Still, the Yahoo Answers idiot question of the week award goes to the poster who asked "If a vagina isn't used can it heal up and close?"

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Not only do our lady parts tend to lose their elasticity as the years pass (and children pass through them), but they are never to be referred to as a hole in need of healing. A hole in need of TLC sometimes, yes. But that answer is not for Babble version of the Nerve Media family (if you catch my drift).

My favorite "answer" was from the husband who says they can. His source? His wife. Dude, there might be a reason for that. My second favorite answer: "you didn't use it as a baby, and it didn't close." She's right, but let me tell you, that just put my mother heart a pitter pattering, knowing my daughter's cha cha is safe from being "naturally mended" as she retains her pristine childhood.

I'd ask if people are really this stupid, but unfortunately, I already know the answer. Yahoo didn't have to tell me.

Image: Brightcove

New Dad Forgives Guy Who Stole Camera With Birth Footage

My Beautiful Cervix

They Say: Prenatal Folic Acid Not So Good After All

Christian Parents Opt for Religious Circumcision . . . Even if It's Jewish

Obama's Friday Schedule: Tackle Global Economic Crisis, Parent-Teacher Meetings

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:00:00 GMT

Michelle Obama wasn't kidding when she told Newsweek that her husband will continue to make his daughters, Sasha and Malia, a top priority, even as assumes the leadership of the free world. The Huffington Post has posted a copy of Obama's schedule for today, and the first item on the agenda is "parent teacher conferences at his daughters' school with his wife Michelle."

The schedule goes on to enumerate a list of duties that would make someone like, oh me, want to crawl into a hole and hibernate for the winter. In addition to a meeting with the Economic Advisory Board on today's dire economic news, Obama will hold a press conference, attend his daily intelligence briefing, make a slew of post-election political phone calls, and record the Democratic Radio Address. I have a feeling that those parent teacher conferences felt like a mini-vacation.

As any parent in a high stress job knows, taking time out to play with your kids or help with their homework is not only good for your children; it also keeps you grounded and happy. The Obamas seem to understand this more than anyone.

Photo: Celebrity Babies Blog

Balancing Work and Parenting--When You're the First Lady

Balancing Work and Parenting--When You're a Campaign Reporter

Let Your Daughters Grow Up to Marry Princesses

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:01:00 GMT

I was particularly struck by a column in the LA Times that talks about the long road ahead to equality in the wake of California's recent ban on gay marriage. In a brilliant essay, gay rights activist John Corvino invokes one of the more popular, and insidious, ads used to defeat gay marriage.

In it, a girl comes home from school and tells her mother what she learned that day: that princes can marry princes, and that "I can marry a princess!"

The mother, of course, looks shocked. (The girl, for what it's worth, seems positively thrilled -- what little girl would not want to marry a princess? Only their bigoted parents and their tinhorn, ancient scriptures think that's not cool. Work on Sundays? Sure! Equals rights for gays? Whoa, slow down -- the bible says no. Hypocrites.)

Anyway ...

Corvino talks about the trend lines that will one day lead to equality for all. In 2000, 61 percent of Californians said no to gay marriage. This week, it was 52 percent.

"One thing is clear: That shift is on the side of gay and lesbian equality. More and more gay and lesbian couples are openly committing to each other, having weddings, and even calling it marriage. The word is important. Princesses don't dream about someday "domestically partnering with" the person they love. They dream about marrying him -- or, in a minority of cases, her."

In my view, it's only a matter of time. A new generation of wiser parents is raising a new generation of wiser children. As Madeline said the other day, our kids will fix it.

As Corvino says: "When the smoke from this battle clears, Americans will realize that gays are not interested in confusing children or in forcing princesses on little girls who don't want them. But they also will realize that, when girls grow up to love princesses, they deserve to live happily ever after."

It makes me wonder: If your daughter does grow up to "domestically partner with" a princess, what kind of fucked up, vile parent are you to point to a book and say, "You, my flesh, my blood, my all, are worth less now." Just because it's in a book, doesn't mean you have to believe it. Our daughters, no matter who they are, all deserve the happily ever after.

The Obamas Are a Great First Family

Brett Singer — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:00:00 GMT

Remember when the Republicans were supposed to be the "family values" party? Personally, I never bought into it, but a lot of people did.

I wonder what those folks had to say when they saw the Obamas take the stage Tuesday night.

This isn't the first time we've had a President with a family, of course. Bill and Hillary Clinton had Chelsea, the Bushes had the twins, the Carters had Amy. According to The Independent, the Obama children, "will be the youngest children in the White House since nine-year-old Amy Carter in 1977."

The paper also says that the girls, "will face intense scrutiny as children of the first black American president." I guess that means that… you know, I don't even want to say what that means. I hope it's not true, although I'm sure it will be.

Watching the family take the stage last night I felt a certain parental kinship that I hadn't experienced with any other politician. Of course some of that is because of timing: I currently have two young children, so do they. Not that we're all in the same situation, of course. But when I first saw this video of Barack and Michelle interacting with their young'uns I have to admit that I felt like I was watching a normal family. By "normal" I mean just a family, any family, not one that is experiencing something so monumental I can only imagine it. The girls were busting mom and dad's chops. Michelle appeared to be in charge. Barack looked uncomfortable talking about clothes. The sisters were trying to one-up each other. There was something familiar about them. Family-familiar. Family-iliar, if I may awkwardly invent a word. (It's all about change, right?)

Obviously being President is not like being a writer, and raising two kids in the White House is not like raising them in Manhattan. (The White House might be easier in some ways.) But somehow I'm finding it much easier to look at the Obamas as a relatable American family, more so than with any past Presidential household. Besides, any man who takes time out of his Presidential acceptance speech to tell his daughters that he loves them, and that they'll be getting a puppy when they move to the White House, is someone I can respect – as a parent.

Does anyone else feel this family-iliar (sorry) connection with the First Family?

image: Chicago Tribune via Morning News

The Obama Kids Get a New Puppy

Girl Power in the White House

They say: Obama Wins

Related articles on Babble:

Michelle Obama: The Babble Interview

Video: Babies for Obama!

Girlhood Cage Match: Pixies vs. Princesses

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:05:00 GMT

We've managed to fight off the princess industrial complex for a few years now, but I fully admit I'm into fairies and don't mind telling my daughter all sorts of stories about these recalcitrant, jealous sprites who cause all manner of mischief and glee.

So I was delighted to read this story from Dodai at Jezebel about a cultural childhood shift toward fairies instead of princesses. The new Tinkerbell DVD is the top seller at Amazon apparently, and kids are voicing more support for fairies, who seem to "do" things instead of princesses, who seem more mentally inert.

The bottom line, according to someone quoted in the article, is that fairies mean adventure and action, while princesses just wait around for things to happen or for people to do things for them, like offer a ring and a happily ever after. I bet you can guess which one is a better role model for our daughters.