Showing posts with label feminism-gender issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminism-gender issues. Show all posts

Yo' (Jewish) Mama: Jewish Women's Archive starts Mother's Day image pool on Flikr

5/8/09

On Jewschool today Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg (author/editor of Yentl's Revenge, Surprised by God, and The Passionate Torah) posted a call for user contributions to a new Flikr photostream of images of "Jewish Mothers."

From Flikr:

Photo by Joyous Jewess

About Jewish Mothers: The Way We Were, the Way We Are

In honor of Jewish American Heritage Month and in celebration of Mother's Day, the Jewish Women’s Archive is creating a special photo collection on Flikr about "Jewish Mothers."

Photos can show a Jewish mother, now or in the past, in any context -- mothers at home or at work; mothers in the family and in the community; mothers of different generations and family constellations; formal portraits or candid snapshots.

How would you like to represent Jewish mothers?
Go here to see the set and to add images of your own.

Read more...

Easter / Passover Mashups, Part II: Barbie buys matzah

4/15/09

As I wrote in Easter / Passover Mashups, Part I: Passover Peep Panoramas, I've always liked the hands-on craftiness of coloring Easter eggs, and although I don't celebrate Easter, I have been known to put out on my seder table a plate of hard boiled eggs bearing brightly-colored eggs shells.

So naturally I'm a fan of other mashups of seasonal Jewish and Christian cultural vocabularies, like the DIY Tiny Matzah box for Barbie which Hatam Soferet posted on Jewschool.


She writes:
To make your own box of Barbie matzah you will need:
Measure, mark, and cut four pieces of corrugated cardboard 30mm*27mm. Tape them together in a bundle. These are your matzot (hahaha, insert matzah/cardboard joke of choice here).
For the complete directions, you must visit her post.

Hatam Soferet, aka Jen Taylor Friedman by the way, is the creative mind behind Tefillin Barbie. A sofer, she's the first woman known to have written a sefer Torah.

Take a look at her project and what she has to say about being a female sofer. It's all on her website:

"Tefillin Barbie generated an extraordinary amount of feedback. She featured on Jewschool and Jewlicious, on BoingBoing, in the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, on Ritualwell, Lilith magazine (Winter '06-'07 issue), New Voices, the London Jewish Chronicle, The Jewish Advocate, the Philadelphia Jewish Voice, the New Jersey Jewish News, the Forward, the Jewish Week..."

Read more...

Now, Voyager: Track your kink on the Map of Human Sexuality (NSFW)

11/22/08

*NSFW=not safe for work


Hattip to whoever tipped me off to this ingenious "Map of Sexuality," created by graphic designer (and polyamory advocate) Franklin Veaux.

Located on the website of SymToys, the map is interactive: Users can create a personalized sexuality map by placing flags marked "Things I've Tried' and "Things I'd Like to Try."

It's like a mashup of Google Maps and the Good Vibrations Guide to Sex, except that the geography is completely made up and the sexual practices listed far exceed the Good Vibrations' repertoire.



You can mark what you've done and what you'd like to do, then embed your personal map on your blog as, I suppose, a kind of brag sheet, or a to-do list for the next person you plan to sleep with.

Or you can give your friends the choice to learn what might turn out to be TMI about you by posting a widget to your blog. Viewers click on the widget if they want to know more. (Don't worry, clicking on the widget below takes you to a BLANK map that will reveal nothing about my sex life. Not that I couldn't mark the hell out of that map...)


Find out where I've journeyed on the
Map of Human Sexuality!
Or get your own here!


But you should definitely visit the full-size map yourself and marvel over the clever topography. There will be stuff you never heard of, and stuff no one you've ever known has ever heard of, but the truly compelling thing is how Veaux has laid out various sexual predilections in relationship to one another.

For instance, most people probably start their journey in the sourtheast corner of the map, in the Land of Mundania, which is just across the Vanilla Sea from the Island of Sexual Phobias. To get to the Homosexual Homeland, one must navigate the Straits of Fear.


At the other end of the spectrum, in the northernmost part of the map is an area that lies beyond a mountain range known as The Impassable Reaches. On their far side is where you'll find -- if you're looking for them -- Incest, Snuff Films and Cannibalism. Note that some kinks you may have heard about lie solidly in the Land of Myth on the shores of the Urban Dictionary Bay.

And no, I don't know what many of these mean, so please don't ask me.
And if you know, please don't tell me.

Here's the whole map, but the actual site is much easier to read.






Read more...

The #motrinmom meme revisited: pity the poor advertising agencies

11/20/08

Over on Write Like She Talks, Jill Zimon questions the argument of "Social Media And The Motrin Controversy: Or, Will Social Media Kill Advertising Creativity?" Author Catharine P. Taylor worries that reactions like that of "outraged 'Motrin Moms'" will crush creative advertising (such as it is):

Can we expect Johnson & Johnson to be skittish the next time a well-meaning creative director presents something somewhat edgy to the client? Yes. Can we expect said idea, even if it makes it out of the conference room, to be focus-grouped to death before it is unleashed to the vocal masses?
...
[Clients may make] the decision to run increasingly conservative advertising, until fully addressable, trackable TV advertising gives marketers enough insight into their ROI to realize those kinds of ads are ineffective. Until that time, the conclusion I draw is that much advertising will go plain vanilla, and that's too bad for all of us.

Like Zimon, I don't have much sympathy with the sad fate of creatively stymied ad agencies. "Why," Zimon asks, "is advertising that goes 'plain vanilla…too bad for all of us'?"

And I'm stunned by Taylor's naive assertion that the #motrinmoms were upset not by "the message of the ad so much as its cataclysm of tone and language."

Anyone who studies social media as Taylor does should
understand that that form IS content every bit as much as the medium is the message. The ad's intended message may be "take Motrin for back pain," but its tone and language clear sent other unintended messages as well.

The truth is that the creators of this ad made a tactical error. They bet on the assumption that most mainstream moms consider babywearing fringe behavior.

That may once have been true. But babywearing moms are no longer a fringe group, at least not among the women who are active Internet users.

Better educated and wealthier women are both more likely to breastfeed their babies for longer, and more likely to use the internet as a way to find out information and find a community. If they're stay at home moms, they also have more time & greater opportunity to share reactions online to content they find offensive. Twitter made that communication happen even faster than email and blogging has.

(There's abbreviation on discussion boards and in chatrooms and IM for "nursing at keyboard" [NAK]. Wearing your baby while you nurse them allows you to have your hands free for typing -- although your attention is not always free, hence "NAK," used to explain why you're not paying full attention to an online dialogue.)

Babywearing, internet savvy women naturally resented being depicted as the practitioners of a mothering habit which "common-sense" women like the ad's narrator secretly resents or find to be of dubious value.

Advertising that ridicules is risky. In this case, J&J underestimated the size, power and commitment of the group they chose to ridicule.

And while the ad may have been visually fresh and well-executed, its approach was definitely NOT "edgy" or daring.

In fact, its underlying tactic -- encouraging self-doubt in women -- was around long before the first Clairol commercial appeared in a fashion magazine.



Read more...

He ain't heavy, he's my baby: Motrin ad makes moms mad, launching a new #motrinmom meme

11/16/08

In the middle of International Babywearing Week (Nov. 12-18), Motrin has, for some reason, released a mom-targeted ad that disses baby-wearing.

In its "just between you and me" voiceover, the ad depicts babywearing as a fashion women adopt only so that they'll look like good moms. (The logic is something like  babyslings : mothers :: stilettos : hookers, i.e.an uncomfortable but essential part of the uniform). Instead, the narrator confides, babywearing is just a giant pain in the ... back.

You can watch it on Motrin.com or on YouTube but I've taken a few screenshots:






If you're not a mom (or dad) who has comforted a baby by wrapping her close to your body,  you may not understand why this new ad by Motrin has people so riled up. Basically, it presents a woman who views babywearing as a pretension, who doubts its value ("supposedly, it's a real bonding experience") and suspects other women just do it as a fashion statement.  Or as Alan Gutierrez succinctly summarizes: "Motrin Asks: Can We Forgo the Pretense of Loving Our Children?"


In a stunning example of the power of Web 2.0, disgusted women voiced their displeasure online. #motrinmoms became a top meme in twitter, video responses like Motrin Ad Makes Moms Mad were posted to YouTube, and numerous moms and social media experts (like Mashable's Sarah Evans) began blogging about it.  The Adventures In Babywearing blog began collecting babywearing photos from real life moms.

It didn't take long for some using the #motrinmoms tag to accuse others of being overly sensitive and others to wonder if they were inadvertently giving Motrin more publicity than they'd ever hoped for.

A sampling of voices in the Twitterverse:


 
  
  
 




 

Read more...

Here's why we still need feminism:
Sarah Palin's bizarre cultural cache

10/21/08

Palin most-searched[cue Twilight Zone music]

Consider if you will, a place outside our normal time and space... a land of both shadow and substance. You've just entered the post-feminist election zone ...

I just can't get my mind around the bizarre role gender politics is playing in the 2008 presidential election and the many faces of Sarah Palin. Here's what I mean:

In a Google Trends search I just ran, Sarah Palin turned up 3 times in the top 100 searches -- in three radically different guises: porn star, demagogue & wife.

Porn star

1. Her first appearance in the Google top 100 search terms is #42 nailin palin video, which references a report from the online entertainment industry rag TMZ.com:Lisa Ann as Nailin' Paylin

Hustler Video is shooting a porn with a look-alike titled "Nailin' Paylin." The spelling is sic and so is Hustler. You betcha!

The faux Sarah is Lisa Ann, who "will be nailing the Russians who come knocking on her back-door." In another scene -- a flashback -- "young Paylin's creationist college professor will explain a 'big bang' theory even she can't deny!"

There's also a threeway with Hillary and Condoleezza look-alikes.

The video is in pre-production, but is being fast tracked for release before the election.
The problem isn't the porn; it's the fact that her public persona lends itself so easily to porn and other forms of parody. Where's the dignity in that? (I don't remember any porn films about Bella Abzug or Shirley Chisholm, do you?)

Seriously, I think we all learned from Bill Clinton that sexualizing your political image is ill-advised.

"Demagogue in a skirt"


Sarah Palin action doll2. In her second appearance on the top 100 search term is in reference to search term #80, demagogue, which is studded with links to stories like Sarah Palin -- A Demagogue in a Skirt and Palin the Ignorant Demagogue?. Looking at video of her rallies, it's easy to see her as a one-woman fascist movement, whose vague seemingly on-the-spot phrases ("in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America" ...


"all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation") are in fact calculated, especially since she can't seem to really apologize for them.

Wifey

3. Palin next turns up in search term #83, palin cnn interview, which links to her interview today with CNN's Drew Griffin.

There's a lot to criticize in the interview, but let's focus for a second on her portrait of the Governor as "cherished wife." Asked if her husband's interference in Troopergate was an ethical violation, she purrs, "My husband did exactly, I think, what any sensible, reasonable father, husband would do who was concerned about their family's safety."

Figure o' fun


Two days ago, the Googleverse was rife with searches related to Palin's appearance on Saturday Night Live.

What boggles my mind is how Palin can possess acute social savvy while totally lacking self-awareness.

First, she's parodied on Saturday Night Live by Tina Fey -- who was able to make fun of her simply by repeating her word-for-word replies to Katie Couric.

Then, in the spirit of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, she makes a guest appearance on the show, treated like a VIP to restore her dignity. The scripted jokes about her are good, but not great.

They're hardly needed, however, since Palin's own inadvertent self-parody in interactions with Amy Poehler, Lorne Michaels & Alec Baldwin is so effective.

Remind me, which Sarah Palin is the one that's supposed to appeal to women voters?

P.S. If you want to see the McCain-Palin's "feminism" depicted with stark candor, you must watch Women for McCain:


(h/t: Write Like She Talks)

Read more...

"Hey Sarah Palin," music for left-leaning ears

10/8/08

If you're not a McCain-Palin supporter, you're bound to find this political music video spot-on funny. An anti-ode addressed to Sarah Palin, the video has been viewed more than 300,000 times since it was uploaded on YouTube last week.

(Warning: the lyrics contain the f-word)





Hattip to Laura Solomon who shared this via twitter today).

Read more...

"Gosh darn it, that Sarah Palin sure knows how to wink," says Joe Six-pack.

10/3/08


Dissecting Palin's debate style


The blog post that accompanies this wonderful flow chart on Aden Nak's blog is too harsh for my tastes, but this flow chart is funny.

I wish I'd discovered it before last night's VP debate, though. This flow chart describes the Couric interviews to a T, but Palin performed significantly better than that last night, But the part of the chart that remained valid was the faux-folks self-effacement strategies like "Can you tell a heartwarming hockey mom story?"

What about Palin's folksy, hokey regular-gal tone: darn it, betcha ya, nu-cu-lar. Do you think it was effective? Do you think it's real?

Does anyone else think that the term "Joe Six-Pack" has a negative connotation? More negative than "John Doe" or "the man on the street" or "the people on Main Street" (which I think is the best of those hackneyed figures of speech). No one likes to be pidgeon-holed, but the terms "soccer moms" and "Nascar dads" are at least palatable to the people they describe.

And about those winks: you may enjoy this YouTube video, a quick-as-a-wink composite of Palin's ocular gestures during the VP debate posted by HuffPolitics.




Read more...

Great Debate Bingo Card!

10/1/08


MomsRising.org invites you to use their Debate Bingo Card to keep track of positions and buzzwords during the Biden v. Palin debate tomorrow night.

I'm sure you could turn it into a drinking game without too much effort. On second thought, if you were to drink each time one of these buzzwords was mentioned, you would probably stay pretty sober.

I'm shocked by how few of those topics -- topics of paramount importance to anyone raising children -- I expect to be mentioned tomorrow night. No one in this election is talking about:
  • Paid family leave
  • Flexible work options
  • Part-time benefits
  • Improving work-life balance
  • High quality, subsidized early childhood education
  • High quality, subsidized after-school programs
  • Paid sick days
  • Wage gap / Pay equity
  • Living wages


















So if you'd like to get drunk during the debate, you might want to add a few sure-fire key words to your bingo card, like:
  • Bailout
  • Wall Street
  • Main Street
  • Maverick
  • Washington insider
  • Middle-class taxes
  • Foreign policy
  • Alaska
  • Bridge to Nowhere
Good luck (to all of us. Look like we'll need it)!

Read more...

MomsRising.org's free Vote 2008 bumper clingers

9/17/08


The hip chicks are MomsRising.org is offering your choice of  a free bumper clinger (formerly known as bumper stickers, but now without the glue). MomsRising.org is an online grassroots movement promoting family-frendly poiltices.



Online, MomsRising.org has information and tools related to the 2008 Election, including "8 in 2008," a voter registration drive aimed at moms. 


Click Here To view Get Your Free MomsVote '08 Bumper Clinger!!

Read more...

John Edwards admits affair

8/8/08


John Edwards /John Edwards/John
Please keep your pants on.

Seymour Glass, the complexly tragic older brother in J.D. Salinger's fictional Glass family, wrote the following poem at the tender age of eight (the poem is introduced by his younger brother Buddy after Seymour's suicide):

"John Keats/ John Keats/ John/Please put your scarf on."

Seymour's poem takes the form of a familial nagging: its poignancy comes in part from the naive assumption the Romantic tragedy of Keats's early death could avoided if he'd simply dressed more warmly.

My little parody, however, is quite different. There's nothing poignant about John Edwards' extramarital affair with novice filmmaker Rielle Hunter, about which he now admits he lied repeatedly. In an interview for Nightline tonight, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

The poignancy all belongs to 52-year-old Elizabeth Edwards, his wife of 30 years.

A lawyer and writer, Elizabeth Edwards accompanied her husband on the campaign trail in 2004 (when Edwards was John Kerry's running mate). She was beside him for the 2008 campaign, despite the fact that her breast cancer, previously in remission, had returned had advanced to stage IV (metastatic), spreading to spots on her ribs and hip.

Although neither of the Edwards is being too specific about dates, the timeline published by various newspapers indicates that Edwards was indeed having an affair with Hunter at the time Elizabeth was diagnosed with terminal cancer.

December 2006 Rielle Hunter is hired by Edwards' campaign to produce a series of webisodes for which she is paid $100,000.

March 2007 Elizabeth discovers her cancer has returned.

October 2007 The National Enquirer first reports Edwards-Hunter affair; Edwards publicly denies it. "The story is false," he told reporters then. "It's completely untrue, ridiculous."

"I've been in love with the same woman for 30-plus years and as anybody who's been around us knows, she's an extraordinary human being, warm, loving, beautiful, sexy and as good a person as I have ever known. So the story's just false."
December 19, 2007 The Enquirer publishes follow-up story that includes a photograph of a visibly pregnant Hunter.

Feb. 27, 2008 Hunter gives birth to daughter named Frances Quinn Hunter. No father's name is given on the birth certificate filed in California. (An Edwards campaign worker claims to be the baby's father).

July 21, 2008 Edwards visits Hunter at the Beverly Hills Hilton, leaving the hotel at 2:40 a.m. Spotting National Enquirer reporters, Edwards hides in the men's room until he's ousted by hotel security. His wife had not known about the meeting.

Aug. 8, 2008 John Edwards releases statement admitting his affair with the filmmaker.
"In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up -- feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself."

Aug. 8, 2008 Elizabeth Edwards stands by her huband in a posts on the Daily Kos, pleading for privacy.

"John made a terrible mistake in 2006. The fact that it is a mistake that many others have made before him did not make it any easier for me to hear when he told me what he had done. But he did tell me. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well."

Fine. What else can she say? She's only the gazillionth political wife this decade whose husband can't keep his pants on.

Problem: How to keep male politicians from feeling so "special, egocentric and narcissistic," they no longer feel obligated to behave morally or responsibly?

Solution:
Immediately upon submitting their name as candidates for ANY public office, male politicians will be required to attend a course on the pitfalls of power, for their own safety as well as that their his loved ones.

1. They will study -- and be tested on -- the nature of power: the way is gilds the holder with a false allure that attracts male and female power-junkies and offers never-before-encountered opportunities for dubious, if not downright immoral, sexual, financial, social behaviors.

2. As in Driver's Ed classes, students will watch gruesome documentary footage of the horrible wrecks other politicians have made of their careers and lives, including public confessions, impeachment hearings, and police mug shots.

3. They will memorize the following definition of political power:
"Election to public office is not an indicator of personal worth, let alone omnipotence, infallibility, or irresistibility. Public officials only don -- temporarily -- the mantle of institutional power with which voters have entrusted them."

4. Before bedtime, they will repeat to themselves the following caveat:
"I will not fall in love with the illusion of my own personal power; I will not allow others to fall in love with the illusion of my personal power; and most of all, I will never exploit anyone who has falls in love the illusion of my power."

Technorati tags: , , , ,

Read more...

Planned Parenthood Action Alert in Green, Ohio

7/11/08

New NE Ohio Abortion Clinic Faces Eviction Because Pro-Lifer Protesters Disturb the Peace



According to a story in the Akron Beacon-Journal, G & H Healthcare (formerly Ohio Women’s Center) is being evicted from its new location in the suburban Corporate Woods Parkway office complex in Green, Ohio.



Beacon Journal medical writer Cheryl Powell reports:

GREEN: Protesters might be close to scoring a victory in their efforts to force an abortion provider out of a new suburban location.



Green Mayor Dick Norton said on Wednesday that the owner of a Corporate Woods Parkway office complex is evicting a business known as G&H Healthcare because of disturbances, including demonstrations outside the complex.



G&H Healthcare had been known as Ohio Women's Center before it relocated this month from Akron to Green. The Ohio Women's Center's Web site says that it offers nonsurgical abortions.



Right to Life of Summit County has been urging its members to call or e-mail the mayor's office and to hold ''peaceful and prayerful'' protests outside the business since last week, said Gregory D. Frank, the group's executive director.
The Green clinic provides ''medical abortion,'' which is a nonsurgical termination of a pregnancy (using a combination of medicines, including Mifeprex, also known as RU-486) in ''a private doctor's office setting,'' according to its website.



In a recent Action Alert, Planned Parenthood adds that "G & H Healthcare provides a wide range of women's health services, including birth control, well woman care and early medical abortion. They are even laying the plans to offer breast cancer screenings and adoption services."



From the Action Alert: What can you do?



You can call the city law office at 330-896-6615 and let them know that you support the medical center being in Green, and that the women of Green and the surrounding area deserve access to comprehensive medical treatment. After you make the call, please send us an email to let us know how it went!



From the Beacon Journal: Photos of the scary Anita-Bryant-ish protestors (photos by (Karen Schiely/Akron Beacon Journal)





Read more...

The Girl Effect: Viral video par excellence & a great message too!

6/6/08

This video is sweeping through the blogosphere this morning (I owe a hattip to HaveCoffeeWillWrite, who credits WriteLikeSheTalks, who credits Human Folly, etc.).

Watch it, both for its own surprising message and for its succinct, non-invasive yet powerful use of online video.



(Or watch the video in situ at the Girl Effect website, and download the 2-page fact sheet.)

What's this all about?

From The New York Times Business briefs:

A foundation that Warren E. Buffett endowed with $1 billion has decided to spend part of the money helping adolescent girls in developing countries like Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India and Kenya.

Mr. Buffett’s son Peter, who runs the group, the Novo Foundation, said it was committing $45 million over three years to improve the girls’ chances of staying in school. They will receive microloans for farming or starting businesses, as well as mentoring and skills training. Novo is joining with the Nike Foundation, which is investing $55 million — making a commitment of $100 million — on top of the $36 million it has given since 2004.

“When you affect a girl’s life, you affect a lot more than the girl,” Peter Buffett said. “We hope this will be a catalyst for others to get involved in helping girls.”

His wife, Jennifer, said she and her husband realized this when, on a trip to a rural village in Bangladesh, they saw how one girl was able to stay in school longer because she could pay her school fees — and her brother’s — by selling crops from a field she planted with money from the Nike Foundation.

Read more...

Motherhood by the numbers

5/11/08

Motherhood's facts and figures



One last post of for Mother's Day.



82.8 million: estimated number of mothers in the United States in 2004.

Source: Survey of Income and Program Participation unpublished tabulations



81% of women 40 to 44 are mothers.

Source: Fertility of American Women



2.1: the total fertility rate (TFR) in 2006 — the first time since 1971 that the nation’s TFR was at replacement level, which is the birth rate required to replace the population.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics



4.3 million: number of births in the United States in 2006.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics



25.2: average age of first time mothers in 2005.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics



5.6 million: number of stay-at-home moms in 2006.

Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2006



67% of first-time moms worked during pregnancy in 2001-2003.

(44% of first-time moms worked during pregnancy in 1961-1965.)

Source: Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961-2003



10.4 million single mothers had children younger than 18 in 2006.

(3.4 million single mothers had children younger than 18 in 1970.)

Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2006



55% of mothers with infants were in the labor force in 2004.

Source: Fertility of American Women



49% of U.S. mothers cobble together paid leave following childbirth using sick days, vacation days and disability leave.

Source: MomsRising.org



51%: percentage of new mothers with NO paid leave.

Source: MomsRising.org



4: the number of countries that don't offer paid leave to new mothers (the U.S., Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, and Lesotho.

Source: MomsRising.org



44%: likelihood that non-mothers are likely to be hired over mothers for the same job (given the exact same resume and experience).

Source: Cornell University



$11,000: gap between what equally-qualified non-mothers and mothers are offered for that same high-salaried job.

Source: Cornell University



10%: the wage gap between women without children and their male counterparts.

27%: the wage gap between mothers and their male counterparts.

33-44%: the wage gap between single moms and their male counterparts

Source: MomsRising.org



$4,000-$10,000: annual cost of childcare per child in the U.S. (babies, toddlers, preschoolers and special-needs kids cost more.)

Source: Karen Schulman, Key Facts: Essential Information about Childcare, Early Education and School-Age Care (Children’s Defense Fund, 2003).



751,322: the number of child care centers in the U.S. in 2005.

Source: County Business Patterns: 2005



6.1 million custodial mothers were entitled to child support in 2005.

Source: Custodial Mothers and Fathers and their Child Support



54% and 79% of children younger than 6 eat breakfast and dinner, respectively, with their mother every day. (The corresponding figures for dining with dad: 41% and 66%.)

Source: A Child’s Day









(Thanks to ResourceShelf and MomsRising.org)

Read more...

5/10/08

More links to modern Mother's Day madness.


Mashable! offer 20+Tools for The Best Mother's Day Ever.

CoolWebMoms suggests 60+ Twitter tools for Moms who are serious about Twitter.

Forget e-cards. They're so last century. Hip, happening geeks are sending Mother's Day videos from JibJab.

Read more...

From Wired: Mom's day gifts for geek gamer moms

From our very advanced friends at Wired:


"In case Hallmark's marketing juggernaut hasn't reached you, allow us at Game|Life to remind you that this Sunday is Mother's Day.

Sure, you could buy Mom dinner or send her flowers, but we can't think of a better way to say 'thanks for washing my underpants for all those years' than to give the gift of games.

Times are changing, and your mom might be a better gamer than even you realize. Deciding which game is right for your mom can be tricky. Here are our recommendations."
Author Susan Arendt goes to recommend games for:

So much better than a toaster.

Read more...

Personal essay: Fighting the tide of ‘hot’ Chanukah toys

11/17/07

by Lila Hanft, Cleveland Jewish News, 11/16/07

I wrote an article for the upcoming Winter Jstyle magazine about shopping for toys this holiday season. While I was waiting for people to call me back for the story, I began to answer some of the questions myself. The result was this essay, which ran on p. 4 this week in lieu of the editor's column:

“My kids don’t have any idea what the ‘hot’ toys are,” said a mom I’d once chatted with on a playground. She crooked her fingers in quote marks around the word “hot.” “They’re happy with whatever we get them -- even if it’s just crayons or blocks.”

What this mother didn’t mention was that she resided on Planet Smug in the Pollyanna Galaxy far, far from where you and I live.

By November, normal earth kids have already had so much exposure to this year’s hottest toys that the list is practically imprinted in their DNA. Sure, there’s a chance your kids or grandkids aren’t keeping a mile-long wish list n if they never watch TV, go to school, talk to their cousins, or attend kids’ birthday parties.

From a parent’s point of view, resisting the tide of holiday toy advertising is like being a salmon swimming upstream. We won’t get them toys that don’t meet our standards for safety, cost, durability, educational value, and longevity. But we still must endure the journey through those eight pre-holiday weeks known in the toy industry as the “hard eight,” when the barrage of toy commercials gives new meaning to the phrase “ad nauseam.”

Early in October, my 9-year-old saw an ad for “Deathstrike G.I. Joe with Real Dismemberment Action” (not its real name) and, eyes alight with what I hoped wasn’t homicidal frenzy, said he wanted it for Chanukah.

My 4-year-old heard him and said, “Yeah, me, too! We can use his blade to put people’s eyeballs out!”

“Honey,” I say, flinching, “you know we don’t buy toys with weapons.”

“But, Mom, it’s not a weapon!” the 4-year-old protests. “It’s, it’s, it’s …”

His brother leaps triumphantly into the breach. “It’s really surgery! It’s called dismemberment, but really he’s doing emergency surgery in the jungle. They don’t have medical equipment, so they’re improvising.”

“Decapitation is not surgery,” I say. “A machete is not a scalpel.”

“Oh, Mom,” the elder sighs, “you’re so predictable.”

By mid-October, with toy commercials coming fast and thick, the boys have long lists in their heads of all the toys they want for Chanukah.

The lists are my fault: Instead of arguing over each ad, I’ve taken to saying, “You can put it on your list.” The 4-year-old can’t write, so he’ll have forgotten his list by Chanukah. But I may be in trouble with the 9-year-old.

Two weeks later, high on Halloween candy, my 4-year-old asks for the 50th time if he can please have the Monster Slime Machine with Glow-in-the-Dark Snot for Chanukah. I’m irritated by watching him bounce off the walls in a sugar rush, so this time, instead of the usual “We’ll see,” I say, simply, “No.”

He looks up from the TV in evident surprise.

“There’s no way I’m buying you that,” I reiterate, in case he missed it.

His shock turns to amused incredulity: “Oh, Mommy, you don’t mean that.”

We’ve seen one ad for the Hot Wheels Monster Dino-Park 12 times in the space of an hour, so I’m not surprised when my 4-year-old says he wants it for Chanukah.

“You know,” I say, getting creative, “in the attic we still have your brother’s Hot Wheels Pterrordon Terrordome. Would you like that?”

“Mom,” he says, disgusted. “That’s just a pteradon. A Monster T-Rex is much scarier.”


A week later, after watching a morning of “Dora the Explorer” with ads, the 4-year-old decides he wants the Bratz Glitzy Glamour Car with Bling.

His brother is horrified. “Mom, you have to tell him he can’t have that. It’s for girls!”

“It’s OK if he wants to play with it,” I say. Hey, I’m a feminist. And in any case, I know it will only be a matter of days, if not hours, before his friends will tell him in no uncertain terms that he has stepped over the line. Preschoolers are more rigid about gender roles than born-again Christians.

Sure enough, the next day the 4-year-old glances dismissively at the TV and says, “I don’t want the Bratz Glitzy Glamour Car anymore. That’s for girls.” He makes a yucky face.

A few minutes later, however, he muses, “Although … maybe if Deathstrike G.I. Joe could drive it, it would still be cool.”

Like there’s any chance those Bratz would relinquish their car keys to G.I. Joe! They’re no fools.


The week before Thanksgiving, I overhear my husband explaining to the 4-year-old that the ad for the Hot Wheels Monster Dino-Park is misleading. “This part of the commercial is animated,” he says. “The cars won’t really move on their own like that. You’ll have to move them around with your hands.”

Stubborn silence. TV does not lie.

“It’s a trick,” my husband starts again. He stands up, seeking a visual aid for this lesson in consumer literacy. “I’ll show you what I mean. There’s a Pterrordon Terrordome in the attic that your brother’s barely touched. Wanna go take a look?”

“Dad,” he says, disgusted. “That’s a just a pteradon ...”

I snicker and walk away. I know how this one ends.


On Thanksgiving Day, the cousins hotly debate my kids over which toys are the coolest. The Monster Slime Machine? The Remote Control Hell-o-Copter? The Blood ’n Guts Team Portable Autopsy-Mobile?

Finally, the kids disappear upstairs and silence ensues.

“It’s quiet,” I say.

“Too quiet,” adds my husband.

We go upstairs, where we find speechless, slack-jawed children glued to a huge plasma TV, Playstation 2 game controllers clutched in their sweaty hands.

On the screen, jerkily animated guys in fuzzy green combat gear spray what appears to be napalm on their enemies.

“We have to get this for Chanukah, Mom,” the 9-year-old says.

“Yeah,” echoes the 4-year-old, in a trance. “It’s cool.”

I’m stunned speechless.

“Boys,” I finally say, “you know we don’t buy toys with weapons and fighting.”

The 9-year-old glances up at me.

“But Mom, they’re not really fighting … it’s more like they’re spraying paint on each other.”

“It’s sunscreen,” says the 4-year-old. “They’re just squirting each other with sunscreen to protect them from all the fire around them.”

“It’s not sunscreen. It’s napalm. And it’s what’s causing the fire,” I say between gritted teeth.

“Are you sure it’s not just water?” the 4-year-old says.

“It’s … not … water,” I grind out. “It’s A Horrible. Chemical. Turn. It. Off. Now.”

A sigh from the 9-year-old, as he and his cousin, also 9, roll their eyes.

“Mom,” he says, “you’re so predictable.”

Yup, I’m just another diligent salmon, heaving herself upstream for the good of the species.

Read more...

  © Blogger template Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP