Strollerderby : media

Toys R Us Can't Be Serious. But They Are.

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:30:00 GMT

Does your daughter have a burning desire to play Ouija board? But clearly she can’t since the game is totally for boys? Well, for only $19.99, you can make your daughter’s dream come true, because Hasbro just came out with a new “just for girls” Ouija board!

What makes this edition different from the original Ouija board that can be handmade in minutes? I’ll give you one guess. You got it: It’s pink!

Not only that, but this new edition also comes with 72 question cards, since a big problem for young girls is that they always freeze up when it’s their turn to ask a ghost a personal question about their lives.

According to the product description, girls needn’t worry their pretty little heads any longer:

It has always been mysterious. It has always been mystifying. And now the OUIJA Board is just for you, girl. With 72 fun questions included, you'll never run out of things to ask. Who will call/text me next? Will I be a famous actor someday? Who wishes they could trade places with me?

Who would have guessed that a splash of pink is all it takes to get the catty, boy-crazy girl ghosts to spill the beans?

You might be interested to learn that the game is marketed for girls between the ages of eight and twelve. Now third graders don’t have to worry whether that “special someone” will send them a text. They can just ask a dead person! Progress never looked so good.

Image: AV Club

They Say: Kids Who Watch Adult TV Have Sex Earlier

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:30:00 GMT

Researchers at Boston Children’s Hospital have found a link between the amount of adult television children watch and the age at which teens become sexually active.

Researchers tracked 754 children between the ages 6 and 18 at two stages in their lives, first to see how much adult television they watched over the weekend as young kids, and later to see the age at which they first became sexually active. According to Science Daily, “The study found that for every hour the youngest group of children watched adult-targeted content over the two sample days, their chances of having sex during early adolescence increased by 33 percent.”

It seems to me that this correlation may have more to do with uninvolved parents than with TV. Any six-year-old who is allowed to watch several hours of adult television in a day is not likely to have parents who will talk to him or her about sex later in life.

This point of view is enforced by a comment made by a lead author of the study, who said, "Television and movies are among the leading sources of information about sex and relationships for adolescents.”

That, to me, is far more disturbing than any correlation established between teen sexual activity and television. If parents and educators were talking to kids about healthy sexual behavior, they wouldn’t be nearly as likely to be influenced by the drunken promiscuity portrayed on shows like The O.C. and Gossip Girl.

I’m certainly no fan of the majority of mainstream television—particularly not as entertainment for six-year-olds—but it would be much easier, and perhaps more effective, to raise awareness about the need for parents to openly discuss healthy sexual behavior with their kids than it would be to substantially shift the entire foundation of popular culture.

It’s high time that more studies on teen sexuality activity focused on parent-child relationships, rather than just on the media.

Photo: saidaonline.com

What Burlesque Can Teach Your Daughter

Nickelodeon Asks Kids to Unplug - For a Minute that Is

SunnyChanel — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:30:00 GMT

Nickelodeon is asking kids to unplug. Well, not from TV but all games and gadgets. Why would they do such a thing? They’re asking for kids to unplug for Earth Day to “symbolize a commitment to helping the environment.” But they’re not requesting that kids detox from media all day, heavens no. They’re asking for one minute, and that minute doesn’t include TV. And that minute is conveniently scheduled for 9pm on April 22, when most of their demographic will be fast asleep.

Really? One minute? Can’t our kids handle and hour, a day, or even a week?

But beyond the unplugged minute, they may also be urging viewers, as they have in the past, to go our and play for “three hours one day each year.”

What do you think would be a good length of a media fast?

Source

Morning News - The Obama Bracket

Brett Singer — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:00:00 GMT

Monday Monday… Can't trust that day…

Actually, you kind of can trust Monday. It's fairly reliable in that it always comes after Sunday. I don't think that's what Mama Cass and Co. were talking about, but then again, it was the 60's, so who knows?

Anyone make an NCAA bracket? I did. I know nothing about college basketball, and my picks are proving it, especially in the Midwest Conference. At least there's no money at stake for me. President Obama made one, which is being resoundingly mocked by many. Some were upset that he even took the time to make his picks, which is hilarious if you consider the amount of vacation time that former President Bush took while in office. (I know, it's a cliché, but it happens to be true.) Taking a few minutes to fill out a bracket is a pleasant distraction from the day's events for everyone, Leaders of the Free World included. If people want to complain about Obama's policies, fine, but his bracket? Let it go.

Damn those blasphemy laws -- a Pennsylvania man tried to register a limited liability company called I Choose Hell Productions, LLC but was told he had to pick another name because PA has an anti-blasphemy law on the books preventing such things. The laws were common the 19th century, but this one was enacted in 1977 when someone tried to register God Damn Gun Shop. The ACLU is suing the state. Heh heh. God Damn Gun Shop... (NYT)

A revival of "West Side Story" opened on Broadway with some of the songs translated into Spanish. Interesting idea but I can't imagine that makes the songs better. Frank Scheck of the Hollywood Reporter saw the show and agrees, as did many other critics. (Note: I haven't seen this production. I'll probably stick with the movie.)

The post office is in trouble. They lost almost 400 million dollars last quarter and are offering early retirement to 150,000 employees, in addition to staff cutbacks and location closures. Not enough people mailing letters I guess.

Susan MacDougal (remember her?) can't have the transcript of her own testimony in the Whitewater trial. She was hoping to use it for a novel or screenplay. Whitewater looks pretty damn tame compared to all the nonsense going on these days.

Some governors, including Nevada's Jim Gibbons, are turning down federal money to beef up their unemployment funds because they don't like the 'strings' that are attached. The thing is, those strings disappear when the federal cash runs out. (This according to a New York Times editorial.) Nevada will run out of unemployment money by the end of the year if they don't take the government cheese. (Nose, you don't mind if I cut you off to spite my face, do you? Cool, thanks.) You can't play games like this when people are out of work. And unemployment money gets taken out of your check every week for a reason. You get it back if you're unemployed. Hence the name. So it's not unreasonable for people to expect to receive that money if they lose their jobs. In other Republican Governor news, Alaska's Sarah Palin (perhaps you've heard of her?) is only accepting Federal money for projects that are truly "shovel ready." Alaska Democrats are not happy, saying that she is playing politics with state residents. There's definitely a shovel needed for what's coming out of the mouths of both Republicans and Democrats these days, but it's not the kind you use to fix roads.

Eliot Spitzer is talking smack about Andrew Cuomo. Hey! Here's an idea, Spitzy. Shut up. You have no credibility anymore. Sorry. You screwed up. Apologize and go away. Although maybe you can blog for Huffington Post like Gary "Monkey Business" Hart. ("G'head! Follow me! You won't find anything! Wait, you thought I meant that? I was only kidding! Aw, crap…")

Responding to Sheri's comment: I hadn't heard about what the President said on TV, so I looked it up. Seems that while being interviewed by Jay Leno on the Tonight Show, President Obama said of his bowling skills, "It's like the Special Olympics or something." He apologized to the President of the Special Olympics before the show aired. Comments at ABC News' web site range from "who cares?" to "see? I told you he was an idiot." (I'm paraphrasing.) I can't say I agree with those who say that this is somehow on the same scale as other "gaffes" spoken by Republican politicians, or even "gaffes" from Democrats. Personally, I think the President is a little bit too much of a regular guy, at least in the way that he sometimes speaks in public. It was a dumb joke but hardly the worst thing ever. He also invited Special Olympians to the White House to do some bowling. There's one Special Olympic bowler who has three perfect games to his credit, so maybe he can give the Prez some pointers. By the way, Sarah Palin weighed in on the President's comments, because she's not all about politics like some politicians. This issue really effects Alaska, hence her very public reaction. Also: the President of the Special Olympics is Tim Shriver, Maria's brother, and therefore Ah-nuld's brother-in-law. That has nothing to do with anything except that I think it would be fun to have Arnold Schwarzenegger as your brother-in-law. The Governator, by the way, supports Obama's stimulus plan.

Tuesday, Tuesday… I trust that day… Nah, doesn't have the same ring to it. I guess John Phillips knew what he was talking about. See you tomorrow.

Image: WhiteHouse.gov via Washington Post

Morning News - Natasha Richardson Dies (UPDATE - Autopsy Information)

Morning News - March Madness or March Sadness?

Morning News - Cheney, Duct Tape, Outer Space

Open Letter To The Woman Who Pushed Me While I Was Picking Up My Kid

Back to the Third Grade for This 71-Year-Old

They Say: Old School Lice Checks Are All Wrong

UPDATE: Did M.I.A Really Name Her Baby Ickitt?

Why Teens Are Quick to Blame Rihanna

Keep This Kid Away From The Dog

Morning News - iPhone Gets Feature Other Phones Already Have

Brett Singer — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:00:00 GMT

Updating yesterday's Natasha Richardson story: an autopsy reveals that she died of bleeding in the brain and "she might have survived had she received immediate treatment." The thing is, people with this sort of injury typically feel fine at first. So sad.

NBC is launching a show to compete with "American Idol." Simon Cowell probably thinks this is a "horrible" idea. ("Horrible" is one of the words he uses a lot, right?) On "Idol", Alexis Grace went home. She was shocked. Shocked. Why are they always so surprised? I guess you have think you're a major talent to get on TV and sing like that but just once it'd be fun to hear someone say, "Yeah, I suck. It was only a matter of time before I got the boot."

Why is Steve Wozniak on "Dancing With The Stars"? Based on this quote from his website, I guess the reason is because people said he wouldn't be able to do it. I wonder if Apple fans will keep voting for him the way football fans did with Jerry Rice. Woz has definitely been keeping in touch with his audience, accusing "Dancing" producers of rigging the voting in order to goose the ratings, then apologizing, all via his Facebook page. If this keeps up, I might actually have to watch the show.

Speaking of Apple, the new iPhone software will include bleeding edge features like the copying and pasting of text. What's that, your phone has been able to do that for years? Mine too. The iPhone is nifty but certain omitted features prove that Steve Jobs could probably sell water to a drowning Apple fan if it had that logo on it. (Personally, until the iPhone has an actual keyboard, I won't even consider buying one.)

Financial news update: stocks tanked and it wasn't CNBC's fault. Are you happy, Jeff Zucker?

Austrian monster dad Josef Fritzl was sentenced to life in a psych hospital. Life in prison would be better, but even though he could be paroled in 15 years, it's not likely to happen. The speed of the trial was kind of impressive; in the U.S., these things seem to take a lot longer. I'm sure there's a reason for that but I don't know what it is.

And finally, there were a heck of a lot of babies born in 2007. Madeline points out that it wasn't Octomom's fault -- "she only gave birth to one baby that year."

That's all for now. Have a great weekend and we'll see you on Monday.

Image: Woz.org

New Baby Boom

Morning News - March Madness or March Sadness?

Morning News - Cheney, Duct Tape, Outer Space

Jimmy Kimmel And The Octomom

Morning News - Natasha Richardson Dies (UPDATE - Autopsy Information)

Brett Singer — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:00:00 GMT

Starting on a sad note -- Natasha Richardson has died. UPDATE: according to this AP report, an autopsy revealed that "Richardson died from bleeding in her skull caused by the fall she took on a ski slope...The medical examiner ruled her death an accident, and doctors said she might have survived had she received immediate treatment."

She's one of those actresses that everyone seemed to absolutely adore on and off stage. I saw her perform in 'Cabaret' just before the show opened to rave reviews; she was amazing to watch. An appreciation of her life is here.

Pope Benedict XVI has folks up in arms because, speaking about the AIDS epidemic in Africa, he said, "You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, it increases the problem." Cathy Lyn Grossman at USA Today has an intriguing post in their Religion section titled, "Could choosing condoms mean choosing life?" Interesting idea.

The way everyone is carrying about the Jon Stewart / Jim Cramer kerfuffle (and really, what is it if not a kerfuffle?) you would think that their "feud" actually had some effect on the world at large. Or that more than 2.3 million people actually watched it. I'm not saying that's not a good number, but it's not exactly Earth shaking. Anyway, Jeff Zucker, the head honcho of NBC Universal, is all up in Jon Stewart's grill, saying that Jon is like, being unfair and stuff when he blames the financial crisis on CNBC's reporting. (That's not an exact quote; you can read Zucker's full quote here.) The thing is, that's not really what Stewart was saying. To me, the most important line from the interview he did with Cramer was, "It's not a f**king game, man." Cramer seemed to be telling Stewart that it was perfectly OK to say something under the guise of financial advice that wasn't entirely accurate as long as it was entertaining. Frankly, that pisses me of as well. For Stewart to question the worth of a network's reporting is a good thing, or it should be. Disagreeing with him is fine as well. Sing it with me now -- ain't that America, you and me… Also, if Jeff Zucker wants to yell at someone, it should probably be Cramer. He's the one who turned a bit on The Daily Show into something that has dominated news cycles for several days now.

Continuing with financial news, the Fed is doing more things that I don't entirely understand. This time they're buying "long-term U.S. government debt." (Someday someone will explain to me why anyone would want to buy debt.) This causes many things to happen, including wailing and gnashing of teeth. One possible good outcome of whatever-this-is is that mortgage rates will be vewy, vewy low for now, so if you need one, this is a good time to get it. Also on the good news front: fears of economic deflation have decreased! Why? Because the Consumer Price Index rose by .04%! Whoo-hoo! (Disclaimer: If you are getting your financial news from me, stop. Right. Now.)

Last but not least (if you're into college basketball), the NCAA Tournament, aka March Madness, starts today at noon. You can watch every game online at CBSSports.com, which is good for fans who will be stuck in an office all day. Of course, these people should probably be, you know, working. But who are we to judge?

That's all for today, back on Friday. Quick, fill out your bracket!

Image: Famecrawler

Morning News - Cheney, Duct Tape, Outer Space

GMA Tweets Details On Levi Johnston And Son

Jimmy Kimmel And The Octomom

Oprah Gets It Right On Chris Brown

Natasha Richardson Dead

Update: Mom Seeking Lover for Down's Son Says Media Sensationalized Story

Miriam Axel-Lute — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:15:00 GMT

Don't believe what you read in the papers. I just got off the air from the World Have Your Say BBC radio program with Lucy and Otto Baxter.

Lucy is the mom I wrote about yesterday who was reported as desperately seeking a lover for her 21-year-old son with Down's. But according to Lucy herself, the article I was working off had things a bit skewed. Yes, she supports her son's right to have sex and to have a girfriend and is helping him look, but, she says, it's absolutely not her in the driver's seat. She also didn't seek the publicity: it sought them based on a small section on relationships in a documentary about Otto's life that's being released soon. And the idea of visiting sex workers in Amsterdam came up between Otto and his friends—she wouldn't disapprove, but he'd be paying himself, thank you very much.

I still harbor a little concern about his life being overshadowed by her mainstreaming activism. Lucy was certainly not letting him talk for himself (not, to be fair, that he had much to say, and I was cringing at the personal and stupid questions being asked of him. Would he rather have a girlfriend or go to a prostitute? Are you serious?). And there was a long debate on the show about people with Down's becoming parents before anyone thought to ask Otto if he wanted to be a father. (Not really, at least not yet.)

But it does seem that the at least some if not most of the yuck factor may have been introduced in the telling. In the meantime, some of the discussions of sex and disability it has spawned could be useful perspectives for parents whose kids may face these issues later in their lives.

Related posts:

Mom seeks lover for grown son with Down's

More by this author:

They [Didn't] Say: Not Even a Drop of Alcohol

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:30:00 GMT

Oh the pull of the easy, dramatic headline.

Lauredhel, over at Hoyden About Town, has two interesting, detailed posts up recently about the, shall we say, divergance between what a scientific study and a set set of agency guidelines, respectively, actually say, and what's been been reported about them. It's all Aussie, but I know the same things happen here (and presumably booze and pregnancy aren't that different down under, physically).

In the first, she takes apart a study that finds an increased risk of pre-term birth for binge drinkers (shocking, I know) and, with very slim margins of confidence, women who drink heavily in the first trimester and then stop (but not, interesting, those who keep going. It would be interesting to come up with a mechanism for why that would be). It does not find an increased risk for light drinking. Also, much of its data appears to be pretty tentative.

But the coverage of it says the report states that "abstinence is still the safest option" (It might be. I did. But the report says no such thing) and also gets the data about the trimesters wrong. Laurdehel takes both the original study and the coverage apart in minute detail.

In the second, quite similarly, she notes some health guidelines that, based on no new evidence, reverse their previous stance that a light amount of drinking is OK while breastfeeding and start suggesting abstinence, though retaining a level-headed description of what would constitute a cautious approach to alcohol and lactation. The coverage (1) implied that there was some new evidence that it's more dangerous than previously believed and (2) never even mentioned the existence of the more nuanced guidelines.

It's easy to pick on journalists, sometimes too easy, but it's also necessary sometimes, because they have all the same cultural biases and habits (like infantilizing women and being alarmist about pregnancy) as everyone else.

Photo by timomcd.

More by this author:

Is It Ethical for Scientists to Use Their Kids as Test Subjects?

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 22:10:00 GMT

Here’s a reason for wanting a baby that you don’t hear everyday: “I really want to study him and do experiments with him.” This was the thinking of Dr. Sinha, an MIT neuroscience professor, upon the birth of his son.

According to the New York Times, Dr. Sinha is just one of many scientists using their kids as test subjects in large part because “children make reliable participants in an era of scarce research financing.” Is this creepy or just practical?

Numerous kids of scientists have been instrumental in research on everything from brain scans to the effects of media on children. In an extreme example, scientist Deb Roy recorded nearly 70 percent of his son’s waking hours for the first three years of his life in order to study language development.

Many scientists argue that using their own children as subjects proves the safety of the experiments: why would they put their own kids, whom they love above all else, at risk? Furthemore, review boards establish rules for safe experimentation, including a prohibition on videotaping toilet training, which could prove embarrassing later.

I understand this argument, and don't doubt that well-meaning scientists would never willingly put their children at risk. However, I do question the ways experimenting on children can affect parent-child relationships. So does Robert M. Nelson, the director of the Center for Research Integrity at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “The role of the parent is to protect the child,” he said. “Once that parent becomes an investigator, it sets up an immediate potential conflict of interest.”

Like most parenting issues, this question defies a black-and-white answer. Some grown children of scientists look back on their time as test subjects as a fun way to bond with their parents, while others remember the experiments as stressful, colored by an uncomfortable need to please their parents.

Do you think there’s a surefire way to predict whether experiments with children will be harmless or harmful? If not, is it wrong for scientists to use their children in the service of scientific inquiry?

Photo: New York Times

New Mom Jessica Alba Was Totally Photoshopped - Check Out the Before & After Pics

SunnyChanel — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:30:00 GMT

Seeing Jessica Alba showing off her sleek and lithe body in the recent Campari campaign totally pissed me off. Yeah, I was jealous. After 2 ½ years I still don’t have my belly back in any semblance of it’s prebaby form. So I was partly thrilled and partly disgusted to see the leaked photos that prove that they did a total PhotoShop overhaul on Jessica Alba’s body, the new mother of a five month old.

The graphics team made some pretty drastic changes to the images taken by Mario Testino. They took off inches from her waist and hips, gave a lift to her bustline and made her skin look like flawless buttered caramel. Thing is she looks just as good in her original photos, it doesn’t seem like they needed to make the adjustments they did, or as drastically. Regardless, pre PhotoShop she still looks amazing after having a baby five months ago. And yes, I’m still jealous.

Do you think they needed to make so many changes to Jessica Alba's image?

Oh and check out Hannah's post New Mom Jessica Alba Poses in Campari Calendar here

New Mom Jessica Alba Poses in Campari Calendar

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:30:00 GMT

To the right we have a skimpily clad Jessica Alba, posing with a cocktail just six months after the birth of her baby. You might be thinking, “What’s the big deal? Yet another celebrity with a personal trainer and a personal stylist looks like a model mere months after giving birth. Who cares?” You may have a point.

Or this photo shoot may be a little different—because when Campari’s photographer chose Alba for their 2009 calendar, he was not thinking about showing off her “post-baby bod.” He was simply looking for someone who could best, ah, embody Campari’s mission of bringing its customers “twelve months of pure Red Passion.”

Putting aside my personal feelings about Jessica Alba (and the absurdly liberal use of photoshop in these pictures), I found myself interested in the 2009 Campari calendar for its blatant sexualization of a new mother. I’m certainly no proponent of sexualizing new moms (or any young women) to sell a product, but I found myself wondering if there was something a tiny bit cool about the media’s willingness to view sexiness as independent of motherhood (inasmuch as any impossible-standards-of-beauty marketing can be cool).

Then again, no media outlet that has covered the story so far has refrained from oohing and ahhing over Alba’s amazingly slender, yet curvaceous “post-baby bod.”

What do you think: yet another example of making women feel that they should be both devoted mothers and fit, sexy women, or an example of a decidedly sleazy campaign widening, ever so slightly, the definitions of sexiness and motherhood?

Photo: Jezebel

Post-Election, Women Hate Sexism Almost as Much as Feminism

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:34:00 GMT

A recent survey on post-election attitudes to sexism reveals that a majority of Americans live in La La Land. For starters: While most men don’t believe there is gender bias in the media or at home, almost half (4 in 10) “freely admit to having sexist attitudes towards a female president.”

Espousing similarly mind-boggling contradictions, the vast majority of women believe that Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton were treated unfairly by the media—but would be mortified to call themselves “feminists.” Only 20 percent of women identify as feminist, and even fewer (17 percent) would be supportive of their daughters’ using the label.

Merriam Webster defines feminism as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.” In other words, most women are embarrassed to label themselves as people who believe in gender equality, but are outraged over the media’s coverage of Palin’s hair. Only 48 percent of women believe that the media treated Clinton fairly, and far fewer female respondents (29 percent) believe that Palin got fair treatment. (Perhaps Palin seemed to get harsher gender-based media coverage because Clinton wasn’t, say, buying $150,000 worth of clothes on the GOP’s dime?)

Sure, some high-profile activists may have given the term “feminist” a more extremist connotation than many women would like it to have, but that doesn’t necessitate rejecting the whole theory. I don’t agree with many of PETA’s over-the-top tactics, but that doesn’t mean I stop calling myself a vegetarian.

Ready for more oblivious sexism? 39 percent of men feel that the role of president is more “naturally suited” to a man than to a woman. I guess that explains why so many more men than women (two-thirds to less than half) believe there is gender equality in the home—the wife just does all the housework because she is more “naturally suited” to it.

On the upside, the poll was relatively small, with 1,000 respondents.

Photo: Jezebel

Dudes for Palin: Vote for the Hot Chick!

Multitasking Turns Grey Matter "Brown"

Shannon LC Cate — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:32:00 GMT

When I was a kid, all I wanted to do was read. I could sit in a corner of my room and read all day long--ten, twelve hours--and barely take a break to pee and eat. To me, multitasking meant walking home from school and reading my novel at the same time (don't try this yourself, kids). These days, kids have computers, video games, a bazillion television channels, iphones, yadda yadda, fill-in-the-technological blank. They do twenty things at once. If they don't have twenty things to do, they get bored.

So says NPR's recent report on teens and multitasking. According to recent brain research, there is concern that kids with not-yet-fully developed brains are doing damage to precious grey matter with too much skittering back and forth between this distraction and that. David Meyer from the University of Michigan, who specializes in the effect of multitasking on the brain, finds that:

"Multitasking causes a kind of brownout in the brain. Meyer says all the lights go dim because there just isn't enough power to go around. So, the brain starts shutting things down — things like neural connections to important information."

A lay-mom such as myself might call this losing your train of thought. It sounds like basic common sense to me. How many times a day do I walk into a room and forget why I'm there because I spot something else that needs to be done? Moms of young children live in this brown-out. But it might be more dangerous for teenagers whose brains aren't fully developed and who have, as a result, less impulse-control. It's impulse control that keeps us from necessarily following every distraction into oblivion, completing nothing in the end.

My kids are mere babes of three and one. But I find myself wondering how I will ever teach them to control those impulses to follow every white rabbit the increasingly ubiquitous media throws in their path as they get older and further from my motherly firewall.

Parents of teens: how do you handle this issue?

Second Best for the Hard-to-Adopt?

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:30:00 GMT

One of the strangest commentaries in the renewed debate over Florida's gay adoption ban comes in the form of an editorial from the Palm Beach Post.

It starts off strongly, calling the ban "cruel" and "cowardly," saying it arose from a "nasty" anti-gay rights campaign, and noting that even the judge who wrote the 6–6 court decision in 2004 upholding the ban said he thought it should be overturned legislatively.

And then, in the last paragraph, it's like the Rev. Dobson's astral projection starts fighting with the writer for control, and suddenly things take a bizarre turn: "Ideally, adoptive children would go to two loving, heterosexual parents. But the children whom homosexuals have tried to adopt are the hardest to place."

So, if I follow this reasoning, the ban is only a problem because there aren't enough loving straight couples around willing to adopt kids who aren't non-disabled white infants.

Does that mean the ban is "cruel" because it makes the other straight adoptive couples feel guilty and "cowardly" because it won't just up and admit that it's handy to let the noble savages gays to do the hard work? Somehow want to help the Palm Beach Post dig themselves out of this one?

Substance Abuse Causes Cosleeping!

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:45:00 GMT

The ridiculous things that get spouted about cosleeping just keep getting more ridiculous.

This quote from a Ft. Myer, Florida, newspaper really takes the cake though:

"Substance abuse is the leading factor in the harm caused to children. It's been linked to abuse and neglect, such as the cases of co-sleeping - where parents or other relatives sleep with children - which has led to infants suffocating."

OK, let's break this down:

Cosleeping while abusing drugs or alcohol is dangerous. Absolutely, no question, no argument.

But saying substance abuse leads to "cases of cosleeping, which has led to infants suffocating" is like saying irresponsible drinking causes cases of driving, which has led to fatal car crashes. It's nonsense that implies it's sleeping next to an adult, not the drugs (or anything else about the context), that's dangerous.

Safe sleeping depends on all kinds of things. Bedsharing can be safe. Cribs can be unsafe. And vice versa. The search for the universal right answer keeps us from making both safer and identifying when is the right time for each.

Photo by matsuyki.

They're Missing, Too

Amy Kuras — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:32:00 GMT

Do you know who Caylee Anthony is? How about Callie Munn?

Any child missing is a tragedy. But the way the media covers it, the most newsworthy missing kids are girls, pretty little white ones with blond hair. Missing African-American women or children rate barely a mention.

Callie Munn was missing from my very own city, even my part of town, until she was found after a few weeks (she'd run away). If I'd know she was missing, I'd panic -- her neighborhood is right across a side street from mine. But this is the first I have heard of the missing 12-year-old, while I watched a lengthy profile on Caylee Anthony's grandparents visiting her mother in jail this week on CNN — no new news other than that, and yet a huge chunk of broadcast time was devoted to the story.

Callie's gorgeous, just as pretty as any of the media-saturated missing girls. But she's African-American. And thus, the media doesn't cover her case like it does the case of the others.

In an effort to publicize not only the thousands of children of color that go missing every year, but draw attention to the unfairness of media coverage, a blogger known as Black Canseco has begun a viral web campaign entitled "We Want Our Kids Back Too," highlighting the important work of sites that focus on missing kids of color such as Black and Missing and What About Our Daughters.

"Each ad highlights a different child/teen and reminds us that they are just as human, just as “all-American” as Jesse Davis, Natalee Holloway, Elizabeth Smart and all the rest who receive so much focus. The ads also encourage us all to do better about giving all children a fighting chance for safe recovery regardless of ethnicity and background." Black Canseco writes.

Powerful stuff -- and read the rest of the post for even more.

Depressed Mother. Nothing To See. Move Along.

Adrienne Martini — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:00:00 GMT

So here's the happy ending: Eventually, this depressed mom of a nine-month old was found on Baltimore's Skid Row and returned to safety in Rhode Island.

Unfortunately, the rest of the story will make you want to bite someone.

Katie Corcoran had been missing for nine weeks after she walked out of Providence, R.I., hospital where she was getting treatment for post-partum depression. Through some stroke of providence, a shopkeeper in Baltimore found a website about Katie set up by her husband Rob and this mom-of-two made it home.

I'm still surprised at how little coverage this story has gotten, however. Corcoran's disappearance and discovery all happened at the end of last year and few major news outlets covered it.

You'd think this would have been a cause the Nancy Grace's of the media would have been hyping the heck out of. Pretty, fairly young, white woman goes missing. Oh, but she's a mom who is depressed. Right. Not nearly as sexy as a sorority girl on a tropical island. Or am I too cynical?

At least it ends well.

Photo credit: ABC news

Now They Say No: Teens Deny 'Pregnancy Pact'

Amy Kuras — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:03:00 GMT

Apparently, you folks are interested in the "pregnancy pact" story based on the amout of discussion it’s generated here. It's based on a report in Time Magazine that 17 girls from a Gloucester, Mass. High school decided to get pregnant and raise their babies together.

My last post on the matter drew huge comments, and I've seen other headlines about the story everywhere (including at the grocery store today, on a supermarket tabloid "We wanted to be like Jamie Lynn"—Pregnancy Pact Girls. Sure.)

And now some of the girls who got pregnant this school year are coming forward and saying there was no pact, that it was just chance.

I think something is rotten here, although I'm not sure what. The school generally sees 3 or 4 pregnancies a year, not 17, so something was up. However, the teacher who spoke to Time about the story has since refused to comment publicly.

And the larger question, of course, is why so many girls got pregnant, pact or no. Lack of access to birth control and information about sex ed and pregnancy prevention is one reason. The town is also dependent on the fishing industry –life there is pretty hardscrabble, it seems, and these girls had little sense of hope for their future. And many of them came from teen parents themselves.

Equally as important as why these girls got pregnant is why they so much as glancing at, much less having sex with, winners like one girl's babydaddy, who was quoted in the Guardian with this trenchant observation as to how the spike in pregnancies happened:

"They were horny, it was a cold winter. It's boring around this town. Nothing to do."

Oy.

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

Parents With the Miley Problem

Kelly Mills — Sat, 03 May 2008 14:03:00 GMT

If you live under a rock, let me break it down for you: Miley Cyrus did some Vanity Fair photos clad in a bedsheet with rumpled hair. This one comes after we discovered Jamie Lynn Spears is knocked up and Vanessa Hudgens has topless pics on the internet. All of which I suppose has parents tearing out their hair and wondering how to explain these things to their young daughters, the ones who make up the fan bases of these girls. I suggest something like, "Honey, all the girls on television and in the movies are nothing but tramps and harlots, and god help you if you ever do anything like that."

Seriously? I guess the concern is that people are afraid their children will find the behaviors of their teen idols "cool" and perhaps emulate it themselves. I can assure you that Vanity Fair has not sent Annie Leibovitz to my house to tempt my child into a Lolita-esque photo shoot, so I think we're safe. But you know, there's all kinds of discussions to be had with our daughters about how girls and women are portrayed in the media, and how different people make different choices with their lives and those choices have different consequences. And we could even have these discussions before a 15-year-old poses in a sheet because there's plenty of imagery that flies under the radar but carries the same messages. I don't think we need to be real judge-y or impose media blackouts, but we can teach our kids to be critical media consumers from the get-go. And I doubt our girls are idiots, so we can probably trust them not to run out and try and be like the stars they follow.

Should We Let Our Kids Be "Free Range"?

Kelly Mills — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:32:00 GMT

You might recall the controversy that got kicked up by a New York Sun reporter's account of allowing her nine-year-old to ride the subway alone. She was both pilloried by people who compared her behavior to child abuse, and praised by people who want more freedom for their kids. In response to the whole thing, she started a blog called "Free Range Kids," to promote the idea that kids need the same independence and freedom previous generations enjoyed.

While this gets hyped as a battle between helicoptor parents and free range parents, it is true that many kids are not allowed to do the same things their parents did at the same age, like walk or bike to school or go to the park without an adult. And as the free range advocates point out, a good deal of this may just be due to the increased media attention on abductions and crime, while crime has actually dropped in most instances. I tend to fall more on the free range side, though putting theory into practice is always a different matter when my six-year-old is involved. What do you think: Are we basically stalking our kids out of their independence? Or are the risks of allowing solo activities not worth it?

Should an "Overweight" Beauty Pageant Contestant Be a Role Model for Young Girls?

Kelly Mills — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:02:00 GMT

Monica Grenfell is horrified. Why? Well, see, this year's Miss England contest has a fairly unique finalist: Chloe Marshall, a size 16 (about a size 14 in U.S. sizes.) Seventeen-year-old Marshall has been quite outspoken about wanting to be "an ambassador for curves" and demonstrate to young girls that it isn't necessary to be a size zero. She says she eats healthy food and exercises regularly. Grenfell, however, is a dietician and she hopes Chloe doesn't win. "It would send an appalling--and very dangerous--message to other young women that it's OK to be fat." She adds that Chloe is a terrible role model and says charmingly, "Who on earth does she think she's kidding? What she's demonstrating isn't bravery but a shocking lack of self-control. Instead of flaunting her figure, Chloe ought to own up to the truth. She is fat and she got that way by over-eating." Nice.

Grenfell makes the point that we don't have an anorexia epidemic, we have an obesity epidemic, and that the last thing girls need to hear is that it's okay to be overweight because it puts you at risk for health problems like Type 2 diabetes and heart attacks. Mmm hmm. Well, we could debate that one all day, but there is certainly no consensus among researchers that obesity itself is the cause of the problems. In other words, the real issue is poor eating habits and a lack of physical activity, not the weight itself. And we certainly have a plethora of extremely thin role models for girls right now, role models whose bodies are not a realistic goal for many of the most active, healthy-eating girls in the world.

But beyond that, do girls really need the message that a diversity of shapes and sizes are lovely? You've probably already guessed what I think about that. Hell yes. And while we may not have an anorexia "epidemic" (curse that word) the extremely adverse health effects of eating disorders are well-documented. And by the way, most eating disorder stats only deal with the most obvious examples, while plenty of researchers are discovering that even young girls are using extreme measures to try and get thin, often unsuccessfully, with lord knows what long-term health consequences. I guess that's why I think Monica Grenfell should go f*ck herself for tearing into a brave teenage girl, and while I don't love beauty pageants, I'll be cheering for Chloe.

Joe Francis Will Make "MILFs Gone Wild" Film

Kelly Mills — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:03:00 GMT

Joe Francis, creator of the frat house staple, the "Girls Gone Wild" video series, announced he's gonna make a new video. This time, the subject isn't coeds on spring break, but instead, hot moms breastfeeding their babies. Hmm, why the new subject matter? Francis says, "The sexy mom is every guy's fantasy." Okaaay, but could it have anything to do with the fact that Francis was convicted last month of filming underage girls, and banned from shooting in the Florida spring break locales of choice?

Some in the media have already expressed outrage that Francis would use footage of mothers openly nursing their kids in public, claiming that it further fetishizes breasts and makes it harder for women to gain legitimacy for nursing in public. I totally disagree, and now I'm all irritated by the hysteria. Look, I doubt Francis' motives are pure, but puh-leeze. The more times we see boobies in public and on video and television and so on, the more likely it is that folks in restaurants and airplanes will stop trying to ban the moms who are simply doing the most natural thing in the world. The "Girls Gone Wild" series has already made tit-flashing kind of expected in many circles, and if lactating mothers get to go out for a nice dinner because of a sucessful video series, then so be it. And we can't very well moan about being banned for breastfeeding on one hand and decry the Francis ta-ta focus on the other. Repeat after me: There's nothing wrong with surviving on naked breasts, whether the person who profits is Joe Francis or an infant.

Adult "Bimbo" Players Mad at Parents

Kelly Mills — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:33:00 GMT

There's no such thing as bad publicity, right? In the wake of the widespread hand-wringing over the Miss Bimbo game--hand-wringing I partook in as well--there's an article on how regular adult users are peeved because the site is now getting so many hits people can't log in. Aw, poor locked out Bimbos. And let's face it: After watching a few news clips, it's clear the site creators have been intentionally milking the media attention. I mean, they say ridonkulous stuff about how the game promotes good values because you can send your Bimbo to university instead of the more obvious damage control things like, "It's intended for grown-ups," and no one is actually that stupid, are they?

One irate Bimbo user says that only the worst parents ever would actually let their kids play the game, and that the controversy must be manufactured. While I'd never, ever let my six-year-old play, and I hope I'll be up on her internet activties for a while, I believe there may come a time when I can't oversee every site she visits, nor block every potentially problem webpage. But even after I wrote about the site, I started getting irked by the media coverage, screaming that children will develop eating disorders if they just look at the site. (If we did everything our avatars did, why there would be far more shootings and leaping over mushrooms and I would totally be a lead guitarist in a kickass rock band.) Yeah, I wouldn't ever want girls playing the game. And sadly, they can also learn about tramp clothes and crazy body image from their Barbies and Bratz; they can get the message that a woman is complete when she lands a rich guy from maybe 90 percent of the Disney catalog; and they'll learn about their movie and music idols getting plastic surgery and taking diet pills from any gossip magazine on supermarket stands. Miss Bimbo just happens to be an obvious collection of all that shit in one lame place.

Girl Scout Cookies--Now With Calorie Burning Tips!

Kelly Mills — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:06:00 GMT

Hey, guess what? The Girl Scouts are going to start putting out cookies in 100 calorie packs. That's okay, right? I mean, that's like one Samoa per package... Oh, but wait: The 5 Resolutions Blog just alerted us that the packs are also going to have tips for girls to burn calories. Well, thank god, because I so want my daughter to know exactly how to obliterate the potential weight she might put on from those Thin Mints. Never to young to start counting calories, right?

Sigh. Think I'm overreacting? Well, the packages say things like, "Girls can burn calories and have fun with 30 minutes of activities like these: Ice Skating—126 calories. Gymnastics—72 calories…" Hmmm, I like gymnastics, but maybe I should take up ice skating because when you compare the caloric burn potential of each... How much would I hate it if my child thought, "Wow, skipping rope. That's worth an apple and half a pack of cookies, as long as I do it for 22 minutes." Look, I'm not against encouraging healthy eating and moderation, but good lord, we need to start doing this one differently. Do we have to turn our little girls into calorie-conscious weight-obsessed wrecks at every turn? Repeat after me: Being active and playing and participating in sports are great because they are fun and make your body feel good. Oh, and f*ck the calories. Now put that in your 100 calorie pack and eat it.