Breathingearth.net

This morning I found a new website, http://www.breathingearth.net/. I'm not sure how I stumbled across it, I pushed something on my toolbar and it just popped up. I'm glad it did.

The website is simply a map showing births, deaths and CO2 emissions for every country on the planet. It's fascinating to watch; I've had it on all morning. Since I started watching, 30,871 people have been born, 12,654 people have died, and 6,302,000 tons of CO2 have been emitted. As of this moment, the population of the planet is 6,745,575,768 people.

While I watch the stars representing births, and the black dots representing deaths, I feel torn. The mother in me sees, in each one of those stars, a woman in a home, a tent, a field, a hospital, engaging in the beauty of bringing forth new life. I see the ultimate act of nurturing, of sacrifice, of love. I get goosebumps.

The humane educator in me wonders what the impact of these births will be on our environment, on the human condition, and on non-humans. Obviously, given that I have two biological children, I am not opposed to procreation. I am grateful for my children and (perhaps selfishly) I enjoyed the act of gestating and birthing them. I always wanted a large family, but we will probably adopt any future children. I gave long, serious thought to the issue of population growth before I decided, very consciously, to create two new human beings.

I think that this is an issue where some humane parents get lost in the shuffle, at least those who choose to have biological child(ren). There are many people out there, particularly in the animal rights and environmentalism communities, who believe that overpopulation is the single biggest problem facing our planet, and the biggest threat to the sustainability of our way of life. Each human, no matter where he is born and how she is raised, will use resources - resources that we may ill be able to spare. That said - one could argue that the urge to have children is something that is biologically built in to our species, and aside from the rare (statistically speaking) person who chooses to forgo this experience for personal reasons, most people still do choose to have offspring. This is not likely to stop. To blame parents for overburdening the Earth is to potentially alienate them, at a time when we most need to give them the tools they will need to their responsibility to their children and grandchildren to ensure that there will be a planet where they can live.

Several weeks ago, No Impact Man posted on his blog about population growth - and man, were there a lot of comments! 83, to be exact - it got to the point where I couldn't read them all. It's worth a look - it's an important and controversial topic, one that deserves serious thought.

Nothing Like the Real Thing

I am currently reading Into the Minds of Babes: How Screen Time Affects Children From Birth to Age Five by Lisa Guernsey. It is an interesting, thought-provoking book that examines the research that is available regarding television viewing and young children - which isn't much, I can tell you that!

One area of research that she examines is about representational thought in very young children. As it turns out, evidence shows that toddlers may not understand that there is any relationship between the cuddly grey critter with the floppy ears and the big trunk in the board book and the big grey animal they see roaming the African plains on television. What's more, they also may not understand that there is any relationship between the elephant on television and the one they see in the zoo (or out on safari, I guess, if they were to find themselves on a safari for some reason). They simply may not be able to understand that the photograph or drawing is a representation of something they might see in real life.

This got me thinking about the implications of this research for Humane Parents who are looking to instill reverence and respect in their little ones. Before I had children, and even when Bess was very young, I vowed that she would never visit a zoo because I did not want to imply in any way that it was okay with me that these animals were taken from their natural, preferred habitat and were living their lives in captivity. Now....I'm not so sure. Is it possible that children are better off seeing the animals, live and in the flesh - even if it under less-than-ideal circumstances? Are they able to truly develop reverence for these magnificent creatures by simply seeing them in a book or in an episode of Planet Earth?

What's more, does this call into question the utility of using books for educational purposes for young children altogether? Don't get me wrong - I love books. I mean, I LOVE them. I built a library in my house to safely store the hundreds, maybe thousands, of volumes I own. I probably have a couple of hundred children's books as well. I love reading to my kids, and I think that it is important - vitally so - to help our children build an appreciation of the written and spoken word. However, I am wondering if my little kids are learning anything about the real world from reading books about animals, the environment, and other cultures. Should we just stick to beautifully-illustrated, lyrically-written, Waldorf-y books while they're young?

What do you think?

Homeland Security

As more time goes on and I become more interested in what it means to parent in a humane, sustainable way, the more I find myself turning inward towards my family, my community, my home and myself. This is not to say that I no longer am interested in global issues - indeed, the opposite is the case. But whereas I used to feel like one had to do something BIG to be doing anything worthwhile, I am starting to see more and more how personal action is the true road, at least for most people, toward real and lasting sustainability. There are some people, to be sure, who have a larger role to play. For me, though, I am energized by finding ways to affect the world from my one little corner of it.

A recent post on the No Impact Man blog echoes my recent thoughts on the subject.

The problem is, that when the economic tide goes out, the corporations
shrink and--by a variety of mechanisms including layoffs and plunging stock
prices--so do the benefits our relationships with them offer. Because the
relationship between the corporation and the individual is entirely fiduciary,
loyalty and longstanding relationships don't really factor. A decision at
far-away head office suddenly decimates an entire community.

Meanwhile, because we have invested so much in the relationships
with corporations, the other relationships [with family, friends,
religion, the needy or government] are weakened, which means that they
can't provide sustenance when the corporate bond breaks. Why would neighbors
help neighbors when they barely even know each other?

So what if, instead of investing government money only in corporations
to bolster that bond, President Obama also invested in strengthening local
community and familial relationships? Suppose he invested in local farming and
local business and general strengthening of bonds between people at the
proximate level?

If he did that, when the crises came, and the corporations shrunk,
wouldn't that mean that we might have the relationship with family, friends and
local business that allowed us to rely on each other? Wouldn't that mean, too,
that even if the boom money went away, we would still have the enduring
satisfaction and support of a strong community?

I often think that the key to the sustainability of the planet as well as each person and family is learning to live close to home in all facets of our lives. I am gratified to think about the ways in which I have become, and continue to become, more self-sufficient. I also am grateful for the community that I have been able to build with family and friends, and I know that in tough times we will continue to support each other, share our resources, and make things work. I'm not sure if this is anti-globalism, or anti-capitalism, but it is definitely pro-family, pro-community, and pro-love!

Ahimsa Mama

I am feeling really drawn to the idea of "ahimsa", as described by Gandhi:

"Without a direct active expression of it, non-violence to my mind is
meaningless. It is the greatest and the activist force in the
world."

So it is not just love, but the active, deliberate expression of love. It is not only acting lovingly, but choosing not to support acts of non-love and violence.

Isn't this at the heart of what Humane Parenting is all about, really? We are talking about being consciously, purposefully loving to our children and families, to our friends and community members. But we are also talking about being consciously, purposefully loving on a global scale by withdrawing our support from things that are not in accord with this ideal. We are talking about withdrawing our support (dollars) from exploitative food production, from sweatshop labor, from earth-destroying enterprises, from greedy businesses, from consumption-driven media. We are talking about speaking against these things, and helping others to learn about them so that they, too, can withdraw their support.

For Gandhi, this meant different things than it does for us, today. He may have chosen to disobey unjust laws, to make his own salt. For us, in a culture that revolves around the almighty dollar, one of the most powerful ways we can make change is by changing the way we use our Currency. We can choose to eat differently, buy differently, live differently, parent differently. We can buy local food instead of food grown by multinational conglomerates. We can go outside and hike instead of watching hundreds of commercials for plastic toys filled with PBAs and produced in sweatshops before being shipped thousands of miles to our local box store that pays its employees sub-living wages and does not offer benefits.

And when someone asks us why we do what we do (or don't do), we can refrain from judging what they do and how they live, and simply explain that we are trying to be loving towards animals/the Earth/poor laborers in third-world countries/unskilled workers in our communities.

Speechless

What is there to say? Yesterday, I sat in my living room with my kids and watched the inauguration of the nation's first African-American president, who vows to build bridges and forge peace. Since words are failing me, here are some of his:

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a
weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus --
and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from
every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil
war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more
united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that
the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our
common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in
ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual
interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to
sow conflict, or blame their societies ills on the West -- know that your people
will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.

To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the
silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that
we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make
your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and
feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative
plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our
borders; nor can we consume the worlds resources without regard to effect.
For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

It was a good day. Good luck, Mr. President.

Non-Violent Parenting

Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

I've been thinking about this idea of non-violent parenting a lot lately. What exactly does it mean to be non-violent, as a parent or even as a person? Obviously, spanking is out. But where is the line? If we define violence as causing someone else pain, then what does that mean for us? How do we prevent ourselves from causing pain to our children or other family members; to other humans in our communities, or those without any ties to us; to non-human animals in our environments or across the globe from us; to the Earth herself?

And if we consider it violence to cause pain to any being - human or not - then what does that mean for our everyday lives? I guess what I'm really wondering is this: if we set ourselves the goal of causing no pain to anyone, anywhere, are we setting ourselves up for another kind of violence, namely violence towards ourselves? When I facilitate workshops and give talks to parents, usually moms, one thing always strikes me - how much pressure we put on ourselves to be perfect. When we talk about ways to be compassionate parents, or to lighten our load on the planet, the conversation gradually - inevitably - veers towards a kind of "True Confessions", where people feel compelled to share the ways in which they fail to achieve their ideals.

My goal is never to encourage people to beat themselves up for situations in which their behavior was not exactly what they would have liked it to be. We've all been there; no one is perfect. Hindsight, as they say, is 20/20, but in the heat of a moment we do not always react well. What I always say is that even noticing that our reaction wasn't perfect after the fact is progress, and the more we notice that, the "better" we will do next time. If we continue to question ourselves, to try to live more in accordance with our most deeply held ideals, one day we'll find that we're reacting with more patience, or more kindness, or more compassion. It's a process.

That isn't a free pass for bad behavior, but it is permission to be as patient, kind and compassionate with ourselves as we'd like to be with everyone else. For true non-violence isn't just how we treat others, but also trying to minimize the "internal violence of spirit".

Here's another good one...

In case you've noticed a trend in recent posts, I've found myself noticing a lot of hidden biases and incomplete information in children's media. I suppose one could argue that there is only so much information you can give to children, but I think it's more than that.

Here's a new one I noticed the other day - apparently Disney Consumer Products has teamed up with Stremick's Heritage Foods to create a new milk beverage line featuring the Little Einsteins on the packaging. Therefore, the Disney Channel is featuring "commercials" during their preschooler time block (which isn't supposed to contain commercials) promoting the products. The one I saw was disguised as an informational segment - "Playhouse Disney 1-2-3" - about where milk comes from. First, it showed happy cows munching on hay and contentedly chewing their cud on rolling green pastures. The farmer apparently milks his herds by hand, and then ships the milk in huge trucks to special factories where it is packaged and sent to stores where we can buy it to drink.

Okay....where to start? The cows producing milk for this mass-marketed product line are probably not living in clean, beautiful green pastures, and they're almost definitely not being milked by hand. And where are the calves who are supposed to be drinking the milk? Where are the vets who come in to prescribe antibiotics to the cows to prevent mastitis in animals who are producing several times more milk than is healthy for them (though the farmer on the segment claims that his cows produce about 8 gallons of milk a day, industry reports indicate that it might be as much as 7 times that amount on average in the US)? What happens to the cows when their milk production decreases?

Perhaps this idyllic picture of dairy farms in America is true in some places, some of the time - though even then, this account is incomplete. It is certainly not true in most places, most of the time. Parents, be aware - misinformation is everywhere!