Zoe Weil, co-founder and President of the Institute for Humane Education, recently came out with her new book, Most Good, Least Harm: A Simple Principle for a Better World and Meaningful Life. I've been following her posts on her blog and hope to get her out to my neck of the woods for a lecture during her East Coast tour. I haven't read the book yet, but the idea is that she outlines seven principles that help us to lead a more compassionate life. The first one is Live Your Epitaph.
I've been thinking about that one from the perspective of a parent. Of course, I hope that my legacy will be as a person who made a difference, who was compassionate and respectful of other humans, other species, and the planet. But as much as that, or maybe more so, I have high hopes for what my kids will say about me when they're all grown up. I realize that kids have their own ideas, their own baggage, that colors their perceptions of their parents and how well we did our jobs. There is good and bad to everything - for example, I want to be home with my kids and have made professional sacrifices to do so because I think that having a stable, loving and devoted caregiver is important for young children. But in doing so have I sent my daughter the message that a woman's place is at home? Have I sent my son the message that men work and women keep house?
So, what is my goal after all? What do I want my kids to say about me when I'm gone? I don't know, but I think it's something like this:
"She was an active, motivated and intelligent women who had many interests and tirelessly worked to make the world a better place. But even when she was busy doing all these things, we always knew we were the most important things in her life, and her true motivation for everything she did. No matter how busy she was, she always had time to kiss our boo-boos, talk to us about our feelings, and sit with us to watch the sun rise."
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
More About TV?
Okay, give me a break - I've been stuck in the house with two sick kids for the better part of two weeks. TWO WEEKS! There isn't much else to do besides watch TV.
Last week, when I was suffering the throes of the nasty virus that is working it's way around our family, I couldn't sleep. There wasn't much on so I flipped to the Current network (co-founded by former Vice President Al Gore) to see the Target Women Super Special with Sarah Haskins.
Now THIS is television!
The premise of the show (or the segment she does on infoMania, of which this particular show was a compilation) is that she spoofs advertising aimed at women a-la AdBusters. Segments include Target Women: Chocolate, Online Dating, Diets, Jewelry, Cars, Disney, and more. You can watch them on their website - it is laugh out loud funny. Check it out.
Last week, when I was suffering the throes of the nasty virus that is working it's way around our family, I couldn't sleep. There wasn't much on so I flipped to the Current network (co-founded by former Vice President Al Gore) to see the Target Women Super Special with Sarah Haskins.
Now THIS is television!
The premise of the show (or the segment she does on infoMania, of which this particular show was a compilation) is that she spoofs advertising aimed at women a-la AdBusters. Segments include Target Women: Chocolate, Online Dating, Diets, Jewelry, Cars, Disney, and more. You can watch them on their website - it is laugh out loud funny. Check it out.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Okay, so now that the TV thing is out there....
One of my favorite children's television shows is Happily Ever After: Fairy Tales for Every Child, on HBO Family. I LOVE the "Rip Van Winkle" episode (a shout out to my Fairy God Mentor, Valerie!). It's a show about modern/multicultural spins on classic fairy tales, narrated by Robert Guillome.
The other morning, I saw that they were going to be airing the "Three Little Pigs" episode, which was supposed to be a feminist twist on the well-known story. I was looking forward to it.
Egad, was I ever surprised! The premise of the story is that three pigs were sent to Camp Piggywood to get fat and dirty, because that's how pigs are supposed to be, after all.
Okay. I get that it was supposed to be a spoof on camps where women go to get thin and massaged. Women don't need to be a size 2 or wear expensive perfume to be attractive and worthwhile, and they don't need beautiful jewels, and they don't need to eat to feel good about themselves.
I don't know, but something about the idea of comparing weight-conscious women to pigs seemed distasteful, to both the pigs and the women. First of all, pigs aren't filthy and they're not really fat. On the other hand, the irony of comparing women to pigs is likely to be well over the heads of most children, given the common pejorative use of the term in the vernacular.
I am sure the Women as Meat subtext was either explicitly intended or at least considered. The image-obsessed, gullible pig-women in the story who were waiting to be devoured by the slick and wily Wolf(gang).....part of me sees some animal rights subtext there, and part of me has this visceral reaction to the idea that even if this were the case, that there was a pro-pig message somewhere, few people watching were likely to catch it. I found myself thinking about a talk I saw some years ago by Carol Adams (author of The Sexual Politics of Meat) and wondering what her reaction would have been if she had been sitting in my living room.
Maybe I'm overthinking the whole thing, but really, that's what I like about this show. It gives me the chance to think about children's television. I think that's kind of the point. In the end, I'm not really sure why I had such a negative reaction to this particular plot line, and I will concede that I didn't even watch the resolution because I found it so bothersome.
One of my favorite children's television shows is Happily Ever After: Fairy Tales for Every Child, on HBO Family. I LOVE the "Rip Van Winkle" episode (a shout out to my Fairy God Mentor, Valerie!). It's a show about modern/multicultural spins on classic fairy tales, narrated by Robert Guillome.
The other morning, I saw that they were going to be airing the "Three Little Pigs" episode, which was supposed to be a feminist twist on the well-known story. I was looking forward to it.
Egad, was I ever surprised! The premise of the story is that three pigs were sent to Camp Piggywood to get fat and dirty, because that's how pigs are supposed to be, after all.
Okay. I get that it was supposed to be a spoof on camps where women go to get thin and massaged. Women don't need to be a size 2 or wear expensive perfume to be attractive and worthwhile, and they don't need beautiful jewels, and they don't need to eat to feel good about themselves.
I don't know, but something about the idea of comparing weight-conscious women to pigs seemed distasteful, to both the pigs and the women. First of all, pigs aren't filthy and they're not really fat. On the other hand, the irony of comparing women to pigs is likely to be well over the heads of most children, given the common pejorative use of the term in the vernacular.
I am sure the Women as Meat subtext was either explicitly intended or at least considered. The image-obsessed, gullible pig-women in the story who were waiting to be devoured by the slick and wily Wolf(gang).....part of me sees some animal rights subtext there, and part of me has this visceral reaction to the idea that even if this were the case, that there was a pro-pig message somewhere, few people watching were likely to catch it. I found myself thinking about a talk I saw some years ago by Carol Adams (author of The Sexual Politics of Meat) and wondering what her reaction would have been if she had been sitting in my living room.
Maybe I'm overthinking the whole thing, but really, that's what I like about this show. It gives me the chance to think about children's television. I think that's kind of the point. In the end, I'm not really sure why I had such a negative reaction to this particular plot line, and I will concede that I didn't even watch the resolution because I found it so bothersome.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Confessions of a TV-Addicted Mom
Okay, I'm not exactly TV-addicted. I am not like my friends who post on Facebook about their plans to watch Lost or 24 or Grey's Anatomy or whatever. Truth is, I used to be, but these days I can't recall the last time I watched something that wasn't the Weather Channel. I am rarely awake much past 8 pm anyway, and if I am up that late I am most certainly not sacrificing precious seconds of sleep to watch some sitcom.
Here's what I am addicted to: my daughter being addicted to TV. She doesn't go to school, and my husband and I both work from home during the day. In addition to work, I also write, blog, lead/co-lead two parent support groups, and am working on my M.Ed. We do have an amazing babysitter, but she only comes a few hours a week. That leaves the rest of the time where we need to squeeze in a lot of work in small pockets of time, which are often procured by flipping on the tube to keep Bess quiet for a little while.
Most days, I do a good job of just using to fill a couple of hours - an hour in the morning so I can get up and showered and dressed, get breakfast made and check my email, and an hour at night so I can get dinner made and get my people washed and put away for the night. Some days, the hour in the morning morphs into two (or three...) as I get involved in something and lose track of the time. On rare occasions, like this week when she was nursing a nasty cold, I let her veg in front of the TV all day, if she wants.
I justify this to myself by saying that it could be worse - at least I try to keep it to PBS and Noggin (and an occasional DVD), and at least she is home with me doing somewhat stimulating things most of the time. That, and she rarely sits in front of the TV staring blankly - she usually uses stories and characters as jump-off points for pretend play, and is constantly coming in and asking me to help her put on a cape/dress/crown/hat/whatever so she can act out whatever plot she's interested in at the moment.
I realize, however, that there are many downsides to this nasty habit. I recognize how she often seems overstimulated and unable to concentrate (more so than normal) after too much TV. I also am aware that actual pretend play would be preferable to pretend play that is actually an imitation of something she saw on-screen. I don't like the attachment she has formed to some licensed characters (though the ones she likes aren't the worst ones around - there I go, justifying myself again!). I am acutely aware that no matter how carefully I screen the shows she watches, they are likely to contain lessons that I would prefer she not learn. Last - and FAR from least - it is nearly impossible to allow Bess to watch TV while keeping her nine-month-old brother away from it.
So, what's a mother to do? The research I've been doing on the topic for my thesis (ILP) is only serving to increase my neuroticism and indecision. I know plenty of people who are happily TV-free and others who use TV in moderation, though not too many who have the 24/7 TV that I recall from my own youth. I guess there are pros and cons on either side. In the end, I have an "All Things in Moderation" attitude about it. I try to watch with her sometimes and talk about what's going on, and I hope that I am giving her some media literacy tools that the ZTV (that's Zero TV) crowd may lack. I do not underestimate the value of my own sanity, which is maintained in part due to her viewing hours. And maybe one day I'll be watching a Bess-made documentary at Sundance.
Here's what I am addicted to: my daughter being addicted to TV. She doesn't go to school, and my husband and I both work from home during the day. In addition to work, I also write, blog, lead/co-lead two parent support groups, and am working on my M.Ed. We do have an amazing babysitter, but she only comes a few hours a week. That leaves the rest of the time where we need to squeeze in a lot of work in small pockets of time, which are often procured by flipping on the tube to keep Bess quiet for a little while.
Most days, I do a good job of just using to fill a couple of hours - an hour in the morning so I can get up and showered and dressed, get breakfast made and check my email, and an hour at night so I can get dinner made and get my people washed and put away for the night. Some days, the hour in the morning morphs into two (or three...) as I get involved in something and lose track of the time. On rare occasions, like this week when she was nursing a nasty cold, I let her veg in front of the TV all day, if she wants.
I justify this to myself by saying that it could be worse - at least I try to keep it to PBS and Noggin (and an occasional DVD), and at least she is home with me doing somewhat stimulating things most of the time. That, and she rarely sits in front of the TV staring blankly - she usually uses stories and characters as jump-off points for pretend play, and is constantly coming in and asking me to help her put on a cape/dress/crown/hat/whatever so she can act out whatever plot she's interested in at the moment.
I realize, however, that there are many downsides to this nasty habit. I recognize how she often seems overstimulated and unable to concentrate (more so than normal) after too much TV. I also am aware that actual pretend play would be preferable to pretend play that is actually an imitation of something she saw on-screen. I don't like the attachment she has formed to some licensed characters (though the ones she likes aren't the worst ones around - there I go, justifying myself again!). I am acutely aware that no matter how carefully I screen the shows she watches, they are likely to contain lessons that I would prefer she not learn. Last - and FAR from least - it is nearly impossible to allow Bess to watch TV while keeping her nine-month-old brother away from it.
So, what's a mother to do? The research I've been doing on the topic for my thesis (ILP) is only serving to increase my neuroticism and indecision. I know plenty of people who are happily TV-free and others who use TV in moderation, though not too many who have the 24/7 TV that I recall from my own youth. I guess there are pros and cons on either side. In the end, I have an "All Things in Moderation" attitude about it. I try to watch with her sometimes and talk about what's going on, and I hope that I am giving her some media literacy tools that the ZTV (that's Zero TV) crowd may lack. I do not underestimate the value of my own sanity, which is maintained in part due to her viewing hours. And maybe one day I'll be watching a Bess-made documentary at Sundance.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
All Kinds of Families
When Bess was very young, I used to take her to Mother Goose story time at the local public library. It was fun, and a good chance to get out of the house and socialize (commiserate?) a bit with other moms.
But there was one thing that irked me. Whenever we would read stories about families, which was often, the families we read about were traditional - Mom, Dad, Baby, and maybe another child or two. I am confident that most of the children there had families that looked like that, but maybe some did not. Were their families broken - somehow less than a "real" family? And even if their own families looked like that, was it appropriate to give them the impression that all families do, or should, look like theirs? What about single-parent families, families with two moms or two dads, or with just a grandparent or aunt, or an older sibling, or multiracial through a birth or adoption....the possibilities are endless, but the portrayals were narrow.
This is why I really like The Family book by Todd Parr. He writes about all different kinds of families - those that are the same color or different colors, those that include stepparents or step siblings, those that are built through adoption, those that include two moms or dads or only one parent. This book is a great addition to any story time about families, and to the personal library of anyone with young children.
But there was one thing that irked me. Whenever we would read stories about families, which was often, the families we read about were traditional - Mom, Dad, Baby, and maybe another child or two. I am confident that most of the children there had families that looked like that, but maybe some did not. Were their families broken - somehow less than a "real" family? And even if their own families looked like that, was it appropriate to give them the impression that all families do, or should, look like theirs? What about single-parent families, families with two moms or two dads, or with just a grandparent or aunt, or an older sibling, or multiracial through a birth or adoption....the possibilities are endless, but the portrayals were narrow.
This is why I really like The Family book by Todd Parr. He writes about all different kinds of families - those that are the same color or different colors, those that include stepparents or step siblings, those that are built through adoption, those that include two moms or dads or only one parent. This book is a great addition to any story time about families, and to the personal library of anyone with young children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
