Is Valentines Day the new Christmas?

I don't love Valentines Day, but I don't hate Valentines Day, but I don't really care about Valentines Day, but not in the way where I feel the need to tell people all about how much I don't care (except for right now, but I'm going somewhere with this, so just hang on.)

To me, Valentines Day is a nice little holiday on par with, say, Arbor Day. It's like a mini-holiday. I've always considered it as a cute little side-note to a normal day where if you've got kids you've got to throw down for some extra crafts and cake, and if you've got a partner, you maybe buy a rose or a card or a chocolate heart or something. Then you say Happy Valentines Day and you move on to the laundry and grocery shopping.

Apparently I am wrong.

Inside this house, it's cool. My kids are watching MegaMind while slowly eating honey toast and bugging me about starting on their V-Day candy already. We've got a cake for later and some chocolate (the good kind...because I love myself). We'll play and work and do chores, and call it a day.

But on Facebook, oh, Facebook. I swear it is like Christmas up in my computer. Everything from Galentine's Day (which I didn't even know was a thing until this year, but sounds pretty rad), to Venereal Disease jokes, to sweet memes, to funny memes, to virtual cards. It's your favorite holiday, you hate this holiday, it's a commercial holiday, etc. etc.

Here, let me physically scroll right now, and I will paste the first five statuses on my feed. (Not searching for V-day, just the first five, regardless of content).

1) Happy Valentines Day to all the lovers out there. (picture of a flower)

2) Who says Valentines Day has to be commercialized? I just love any reason to celebrate and have some fun. (picture of homemade V-Day cards)

3) True love is picking the same thing to watch on Netflix. (Oh, FB and your sponsored posts.)

4) Valentines Schmalentines.

5) An Oklahoma student surprises thousands of women with homemade valentines so no one on campus felt left out this holiday (link to news story)

So, clearly, this is a big deal. Feelings about this are a big deal. Saying something about this is a big deal. But I still don't get why. The emphasis is really confusing me.

I mean, the people we love, we obviously love every day, but, yeah, it's nice to have a day set aside where we're reminded to tell them how special they are.

But that takes two seconds, for real.

So, here's mine. Happy Valentines Day, everyone. You're great.

Now I've got some dishes to do.

Why are we always apologizing for expressing ourselves? -- Guest Post

Today I found out that I have Lyme Disease. It has already invaded my joints, judging from puffy tautness of my left hand knuckles and wrist. I have no memory of yanking a tick from my skin. But that’s beside the point.

Yesterday in my online journal I complained about how much my wrist hurt. Immediately after posting that I posted an apology for whining.

That got me thinking.

It’s a strange business communicating online. On Facebook we’re expected to put on public faces and post photos of our loved ones, or, save that, repost inspirational quotes or photos of cute baby animals. Online journals traditionally eschew that for intimacy with a handpicked built-in audience who will celebrate your joys, comfort you in your grief, help you solve an issue you’re currently experiencing.

One thing I’ve noticed over the years is how we’re apt to apologize for complaining online about something.

Doesn’t that sound weird to you?

If we want to vent, whine, or complain about something in our own space why do we suddenly feel the need to apologize? Is it because we shouldn’t express the, shall we say, less sunshiny sides of ourselves? Is it because we’re afraid we’ll alienate our audience? What if we can’t stop whining? Why do we feel we need permission to vent about an actual medical condition?

Maybe our support systems are too preoccupied to listen to our woes. Perhaps our friends live too far away for us to drop in for coffee and a chat.

Maybe we should just shut up, put on the proverbial big girl panties and deal.

BUT WHY DO WE FEEL WE HAVE TO APOLOGIZE FOR ALL OF THIS?

I sure as hell don’t know. All I know is that I’ve been diagnosed with a disease which, if left unchecked, can wreak havoc not only with my nervous system but also with my short-term memory. I’m already past the too-tired-to-move stage.

As I said in my online journal, I know, in the greater scheme of things, Lyme is a mere blip and it boggles my mind that someone as relatively healthy as me has it.

I apologized in my own online journal because I didn’t want my friends – my audience – to think badly of me. I still have that tiny “what if they don’t like me anymore?” shred left over from junior high. I don’t want them to think I’m tedious or I’ve branded myself as The Woman With Lyme. Ergo, I apologize. In my own space.

Heck, apologizing can just be as tedious as whining.

Here’s a thought: Maybe, just maybe, if we all stopped apologizing we’d be more apt to accept ourselves as the flawed humans we are.

I have Lyme Disease which now explains all the niggling conditions I’ve had for the past few months.

As soon as I finish this I’m going to take my first dose of doxycycline and call it a night.



And I’m not apologizing for it.
...

Kathi B. is a writer and baker living in New England.




 

How to handle mean, baseless "reviews" -- Guest post

Last night the Twitterverse exploded around Kathleen Hale’s essay in The Guardian, Am I being catfished? An author confronts her number-one online critic. I’d read it a few days ago, thought it had a great ho-lee-shit quality about it, and scheduled a tweet for later in the week.

Little did I know.

If you haven’t seen it yet, a Goodreads user writing under the handle “Blythe” wrote a review of Hale’s book. Hale thought “Blythe” got it factually wrong, and took issue with the tone. “Blythe” harassed Hale via social media and did everything she could to bring down Hale’s ratings, including commenting on positive reviews of the book to say that reviewer had it wrong.

The We Hate Hale camp’s position is summed up nicely here.

And here’s a post on Bustle with a more nuanced view.

“Book bloggers,” which appears to mean anyone who has a blog and writes about books, or puts comments on other sites that write about books, are shocked—shocked!—that trashing people’s work on the internet as meanly as possible may well be free speech but is not in fact free from consequences.

I can't work out why this article was published. What purpose it could possibly serve, except to frighten and intimidate bloggers.
— Samantha Shannon (@say_shannon) October 18, 2014

The book blogging community is vital & wonderful. I am so sad/sorry about those who may no longer feel they can safely express themselves.
— courtnival of souls (@courtney_s) October 18, 2014

The pearl-clutchers now terrified to post their opinions are laboring under the impression they are reviewers.

They’re not.

They’re hecklers.

This is not to say all comments must be positive. Or represent an in-depth engagement with the text leading to a thoughtful assessment of the positives and negatives and where within its particular canon the book should be placed (that would be a “review”). But little gems like

Fuck this.

are the moral equivalent of the guy yelling “you suck!” at a comedian. “Fuck this” doesn’t add anything to the dialogue. It’s not even a statement of opinion. It’s a deliberate, nasty jab intended to hurt the author personally and financially. And for those still heady with the power to depress sales and writers, it’s not as retribution-free as it looked.

As writers, we’re counseled not to engage with reviews. At all. Ever. And for thoughtful reviews—or even statements of opinion such as “Bad writing and it was a waste of time to read it”—that’s still the best policy. A genuine review by a qualified reviewer can, after the initial pain subsides, be tremendously helpful (it’s usually the first time we’ve heard from someone not already in our corner).

But for the assholes yelling “Fuck this”? Don’t engage as the writer with a reviewer. Squash them like a comic with a heckler.

 STEP ONE: The heckler must be loud enough to be heard by everyone else. 

If you can’t hear them clearly, nobody else can either, and putting down that heckler makes you look mean. For writers, this means don’t seek it out. If you can’t “hear” it, chances are most people outside that immediate community can’t either.

But if it’s coming across your social media, and other people have first identified it as mean, so it’s not just your tender sensibilities? Get on that shit.

STEP TWO: Only engage if you can win.

You’re not in this to be reasonable. You don’t want an apology, an acknowledgement, a recognition or to present your own case. You want to crush. Make them look like an idiot spewing meaningless vitriol.

Fuck this.

Mom, please stop using the Internet.

Craft your response like poetry. Cynical, funny, poetry. You know full well you’re poking an asshole with a stick, and isn’t that funny, gang, when we’re all in it together? The same jackasses who “Oooooooo” with the heckler will laugh at them—even louder, because you one-upped the guy who thought he was smart. The audience doesn’t actually give a shit about who’s “right,” and they aren’t smart enough to tell the difference anyway. (Individual audience members are plenty smart, but the pack is only as smart as the dumbest and most-easily-offended member.) They will side with whoever is the most entertaining, so be that person.

STEP THREE: Be prepared for even more fallout.

They might have more words in them. They might be smarter, or more obsessive than you. They might look you up online and trash you everywhere else they can.

Then again, you might get an essay out of it.

Yes, some parts of the Internet are elegant, intellectual salons. But most mass-review sites are little more than fanboys squeeing and high-school mean girls using authors as cannon-fodder. Every now and then someone says something worth hearing, if only by accident, but why wade through the pettiness to find it? Get a friend to scan for pull-quotes. Then go buy somebody else’s one-star book.


....


Allison K Williams is a freelance writer and editor based in Dubai. Her previous work has appeared in The Christian Science Monitor, Brevity and the New York Times. She blogs at www.idowords.net and edits at www.unkindeditor.com






 

Parenting Tools for Internet Safety -- S Post

The internet is both a wonderful resource and a possible threat. Unfortunately, in world of instantaneous and readily accessible information, it is becoming increasingly important for parents to monitor their child’s internet activity.

Thankfully, there are plenty of parenting tools out there that allow parents to control how their children use the internet without impeding their curiosity and love of learning. Such tools allow you to block out certain inappropriate material while your child can still browse the internet safely and securely.

One of the easiest ways of managing accessible content is by using a content filter, which is essentially a safe web browser. You can choose which websites you deem unsafe for your child to visit, and the browser will block any violent or pornographic content. With your input, the browser can create a black list of sites that your child cannot access. If you’re unsure as to what child-safe websites are available, Quib.ly has put together a list of some great child-safe websites for your use.

Aside from content filters, you may also wish to monitor your child’s browsing history to see what they have been looking at – or attempting to look at. By using the parental controls provided by your internet company, or by installing a monitoring application on your child’s smartphone, you can view their history even if they delete it.

These network controls are available both on a computer and on a smartphone, allowing you to block unsavoury content at all times. Not only do such controls allow you to monitor web usage, but you can also use them to control your child’s internet usage, restrict phone calls and even prevent them from downloading unsuitable applications. All of this can help give you the peace of mind you crave while ensuring your child can enjoy the internet without risk.

Parental controls are a fantastic way of restricting your child’s access to certain applications and websites, and you can even restrict phone calls and texts from unwanted numbers in this way. Check what you can do with your network provider, and soon you’ll be on your way child-proofing the internet in your home.

The internet should be a fun learning environment where children can interact with their peers, research homework and enjoy their time online. By familiarising yourself with child-friendly websites and learning how to use parental controls, you can ensure that your child remains safe and secure online while learning to play, socialise with friends and have fun with learning resources. 

 

7 Things about Pictures of Naked Kids Online -- Contributor Post

I actually had someone report pictures of my girls in their underwear playing in a sprinkler, and in a bathtub (in bathing suit shorts!). They were taken down. And I loled. Okay, dude. W/e. ANYWAY, today Pollychromatic has shared with me an important post on pictures of children on the Internet...what do you think?

...


I have a lot of friends who are photographers. I don’t mean the kind of people who take a bunch of pictures. I mean, honest to goodness, saved up bunches of money for the good equipment, spend lots of time on it, these are actually beautiful, photographers.

I also have a lot of friends who are parents. Some are both. Most parents end up dabbling in photography to one degree or another. It’s part of the territory.

You take pictures of your kids. You take them for you, and you take them in trust for your children when they are adults and want to see pictures of their childhood. You take them for family spread far and wide. You take them for friends. You take them because when you look at your kids, you overfill with pride, joy, and love. You want to give that to everyone. To share a bit of what you see when you look at your child. If you happen to fall into the first category also, your pictures also happen to generally be enjoyable for everyone.

Most people enjoy pictures of kids, though. There’s no real artistry needed. We were all kids once. If our childhoods weren’t ideal, then we generally are happy to see pictures of kids where that isn’t true. It’s a sort of reset on hope, you know? If our childhoods were good, then it’s a reminder of that.

Because we live in the FUTURE! we’re lucky enough that we can share the heck out of these pictures in a way that isn’t too onerous. There’s no more slideshows of the family vacation that you don’t care about. There’s an album online, and you can skip it or not. For the family and friends that are scattered far and wide, though, it means staying connected to each other and each other’s families in a way that only neighbors were able to do in the past.

Which is wonderful and awful all at once. I’ve already said some of the ways that it’s wonderful, and lots has been said about the different ways it’s awful, but one of the ways it’s awful really needs to be addressed.

See, I’ve had several friends now that have had their Facebook accounts flagged and their pictures flagged because somebody deemed that their pictures that they took of their lovely children were in some way inappropriate. By and large we are talking about pictures where you can’t see anything other than the fact that the child is probably naked. Maybe. Under the censored bits. Or the bits that aren’t actually in frame.

So the pictures and accounts are flagged, because hey, we don’t want pedophiles to see the pictures and target our children. Which, hey, is such a mixed bag of myth that I don’t even know where to start with it. But I’m going to.

Before I start though, I am going to say that yes. There are some very bad parents out there. Some parents who do, in actuality, want to pimp their children out. We’ve all read the news, and we know that it happens. It’s baffling, and horrific, and goes against every basic instinct of loving and protecting children, of basic human decency, that the vast majority of us operate with, but it does happen. I’m not talking about that today. I don’t know that I ever will. You go somewhere else for that, okay? That’s beyond the scope of my ability to talk about in a sane and rational way.

I’m going to give a list of reasons why you shouldn’t worry so hard about innocent pictures of innocent children.

1. This is not the child pornography that you’ve heard about online.

This makes me sad to say, but your innocent bath picture of your kid with a washcloth on, or blurred bits, or heck, even without it is not the child pornography that the pedophiles are looking for. This kind of wanders into the area of things I didn’t want to talk about because it makes my head break open and all the tears fall forever, but there are horrific photos of children online. Lots of them. Whole awful, pustulent corners of the internet dedicated to just that. The pedophiles want those pictures.

2. The vast majority of sexual molestation is done by people you know, who are actually in your everyday life.
It’s stepparents, and grandparents, and parents, and the parents’ boyfriends or girlfriends. It’s friends of the family that you have over for dinner regularly. It’s uncles and aunts and cousins. It’s your children’s friends’ parents. It’s counselors and priests and neighbors. It’s not strangers from the internet who happened upon your child’s pictures. That is so rare that it is beyond statistical ability to enumerate.

3. You can not make someone suddenly have a sexual interest in children.

This is something in them. This is not something you do. This is not something that your children do. This is a wrongness in that person. You can dress a child up in the sexiest of clothes, and give them the most dazzling make-up job, and there is not a single right-headed individual that is going to have a sexual thought about that child. Because it’s a child. Because you have to be wrong-headed to look at a child and find them sexual.

4. The people who look at children and find them sexually enticing do not need the children to be naked.
This is just another form of blaming the victim. It’s likely born of the same “I can keep me and mine safe” thoughts, too. People who abuse others sexually are not enticed into it. This is a wrongness in them. It’s not something that the victim can make happen. Pedophiles find children sexually arousing, clothed or not, because of the defilement. Because of the abuse of power. Because they can. Fully clothed, or genitals actually showing, it’s all the same because what the abuser is looking to do is hurt the child. Children could go through their entire childhoods fully clothed even for baths and there would still be sexual molestation, sad to say.

5. You keep your child as safe as you can from sexual molestation by teaching them that saying no and getting help is always okay. Always.

There’s been a lot of talk about this in the mommyblog world for a while. All the different ways that adults undermine children’s bodily integrity and right to say no. We tell them that they have to kiss grandma or give us a hug, or tickle them beyond when they say no. We tell them that they’re wrong when they say they feel a certain way about something or that their feelings do not matter (and yes, I know that their teeth need to be brushed even if they don’t feel like it, but that doesn’t mean their their feelings about it don’t matter). Whenever we tell them that they have to do what grown ups tell them to do, or that what they think is immaterial, we are undermining our children’s basic safety system.

6. The vast majority of sexual molestation is done by people you know, who are actually in your everyday life.

Can I just mention this again? Because yeah.

7. There used to be a lot of pictures of kids naked and we didn’t think anything of it.

A lot of us who are in our 30′s or older come from a time when just about everyone had pictures of themselves as children or babies naked in a bath, or on a rug, or any of a number of other regular everyday kid things that nobody thought was somehow enticing to pedophiles. Heck, in my day, it wasn’t all that unusual for a little kid to run around in the neighborhood naked. It was discouraged, sure, but nobody thought the pedophiles were waiting with baited breath on the doorstep for some naked kid to snatch up.

These weren’t the good old days. Don’t get me wrong. Nobody also thought the pedophiles were in their family. Or at their church. They thought it mostly didn’t happen, and if it did it was strangers snatching kids up. Which we mostly know better of nowadays. Right? Right.

Now, I can’t tell you if the incidence of childhood sexual abuse has truly gone up or down in the last 50 years. The facts are that it has historically been an under reported crime because it is a crime that is perpetrated on those who are the most voiceless in our communities.

I can tell you that the incidences of strangers kidnapping children to do harm to them has not gone up (and you’ll notice in there that the most statistically dangerous people in children’s lives are actually the parents, which is sad and horrible, but there it is). So there it is. Please stop worrying about pictures of kids online that are normal pictures.

Change your focus to teaching children that they have the right to say what happens to their bodies, and that if someone tries to do something to them sexually, they can safely get help. You can (and should) teach them that it isn’t their fault if something does happen, and that consent is always necessary. You can teach them to speak up if they see others being abused. You can get involved in helping to stop childhood sex trafficking. You can do any number of things that actually help reduce the problem. But you can stop worrying about pictures that you or your friends post of their kids that are perfectly innocent. If it really riles you up, teach them about privacy settings. Or talk to them directly about it (that’s part of that whole reducing the issue, right? Right). Hey, maybe they didn’t notice that a little bit more is showing in that picture than they thought.

And finally you can do what everybody else does with the thousand and one other pictures of pets, food, or kids that shows up in their feed.

Skip it.
...


This piece originally published on Pollychromatic on 4/29/14.


 

Journalism Isn't Dead...It's a Zombie.

My mom just sent me an email that listed journalism as one of the worst three jobs. Ever. Like, there's no quantifier in there. Just one of the worst three jobs. This is by Daily Briefing, who uses Bureau of Labor statistics and runs them through a snazzy algorithm, weighing stuff like satisfaction, health risk, stress levels, etc.

You know what the other two worst jobs are, guys?

Enlisted military and lumberjacks.

"One of these things is not like the other...one of these things just doesn't belong..."

But, seriously, let's take a look at those two. I mean, it's pretty obvious that one might be dissatisfied in these jobs because they're never home with their loved ones, or because it's really loud and strenuous all the time, and most likely because you make one mistake and you've lost a limb. Like a literal piece of your body. There are legitimate reasons these jobs are considered the worst.

How is journalism even remotely comparable to jobs where if you sneeze you could lose an arm?

First off, I'm absolutely sure the algorithm they used vastly over-accounted for the danger in a journalist's job. Are there reporters who have to put their lives on the line daily to get a story out? Yes. And in those cases, the danger is (or at least can be) as great as a combatant or a lumberjack.

But let's be real. That is not like 99 percent of journalists. For every one person risking their hide for a story, there are 200 more back at home, typing it up, making it pretty, calling "officials" etc. And it's actually that 99 percent that puts journalism on this list.

In no other line of work is the expectation of what you will be doing so very far from what you will actually be doing.

Think about the people who "become journalists." They're young, creative, idealistic, adventurous kids who get into this racket to be young, creative, idealistic and adventurous. And they're sold a false bag of goods.

People go into journalism to be this:

Bernstein and Woodward as dramatized by Hoffman and Redford.

And this:

Fictional hero of journalists everywhere.

I mean, we go in to find the good stuff on the bad guys, give no fucks, write it up with no shit from management because it's an important story and come and go as we please, fighting the good fight. We want to meet witnesses in bars, and buy coffee for corrupt police officers. We want to hide in the back of a truck bed, scribbling notes as a stolen bunch of paintings whizzes out of state. We want to find the exciting shit and grab on for the ride, stopping only when it's freaking over to type our fingers to the bone while swigging freaking beer and talking to our best friends about the coolest shit ever that just freaking happened, oh my God. And we want to tell the truth and change the world. We want to expose the faults and get them fixed. And we want to do it our way, on our time, with no used-up authority figure telling us we have to "tone it down" or we can't use a fantastic quote because "the police/government/our own corporation won't like it."

Nah, dude. We journalists. We gettin' this shit done.

Sure, your Jskool prof tells you in his steely, tired voice that you'll be eating bologna sandwiches for the rest of your life, and your ear will be attached to the phone, and you'll never, EVER, get paid any money. But do you listen?

NO!

You are a journalist. No negative nelly is going to stop you in your unquenchable thirst for justice and truth! Plus, you are a kid. You're convinced that old prof just 'did it wrong.' You'll do it right.

Womp womp womp.

So, unsurprisinglly, after your 3000th stupid town meeting and between your 500th and your 800th politely worded obituary, it's no wonder you lose your way. Journalists have to pay dues, apparently. (Which is dumb, btw). And those dues pretty much never end these days. There is no exciting story to be covered and if there ever were one, the corporations in control of the newsrooms would sap the life out of it as quickly as they sapped the life out of your immediate supervisor.

I mean, let's not forget about that guy, right? So, not only do you drag your ass to work every day to phone the town council president to talk about petunia growth in your town square while trying not to stab out your own eyeballs with the pencil you keep for taking very quick, important notes (that you've never even had to use one time), you also have to do that for eight hours straight with that guy staring right at you, waves of animosity just rolling off him.

Don't get me wrong. There are a million awesome people in journalism. They're tired, and broken, and disappointed, and sad (for the most part), but awesome. Then there are these guys. These guys who are just sure that your mere existence is a threat to them. You're going to take their scoop (on what, dude? The pony parade coming to town? Because that's all your corporate head lets you report anyway), or their validation (he really needed that 'you should have been nominated for a webby' comment, okay?), or worst of all, they think you'll take their job.

That's a legit concern, by the way, and it rounds out our ways in which journalism is the worst of the worst of jobs. There is no job security at all. Like AT ALL. Take news directors in broadcast, for example. On average, they last 18 months. These are the top dogs, people. Any further up the line and you're corporate. ON AVERAGE, they last 18 months. Fuck me typing if a producer or reporter is going to last that long unless they become the perfect yesman.

Journalist. Pusher of truth. The perfect yesman.

"One of these things is not like the other...one of these things just doesn't belong..."

So, yeah, what this messed-up recipe yields is a whole lot of burned out, bitter, poor, automatons, saying yes to every stupid-assed decision and every ethically questionable agenda that comes their way for fear of losing the job they do for PENNIES, because they're supposedly in it for the love of it.

We say in mass comm grad school that journalism is dead, a lot. We're talking, of course, about the outmoded newspaper model. But it's so much more than that. And we're not even going to go into the blatant sexism and bullshit that goes on. Or how about how everyone not only hates us, but also thinks they can do our job. Like, everyone thinks they can just write. It is infuriating, no? That's another couple of posts.

The internet didn't kill journalism. It's been dead for a long time. Journalism is a zombie.

But!

There is hope.

One of you suckers out there in internet-land is going to come up with a new model that turns everything completely on its head because in internet-land, we are no longer beholden to hours, and yeses, and phone calls to petty officials and bosses, and bullshit. Someone out there is going to break this shit. And they're going to put up something else. And I will be on that bandwagon.

Because I'm in journalism to be Fletch, dammit.

And no amount of firing me, telling me I'm a piece of shit, or making me rewrite a 20-second voice over about a car crash with no injuries that happened three days ago is going to stop me. And I know I'm not alone.

So, let's do this, journalists. Let's JOURNALISM.

Five Unbearable Internet Facts That Will Make You Headdesk for the Rest of your Life

Guys, what are we doing? What is it in our nature that compels us to click on stupid headlines? We already know that whatever that content is, it's not "earth-shattering", it won't "blow our minds" and it probably won't even "melt our hearts". It's very unlikely anything we can read from these aggregates will make us hate humanity, we probably will actually be able to believe it, and you know, the danger probably isn't really in our own home. So, why do we click? Why are we allowing click bait to be a thing? For this, I have no answer. Onto the headlines:

10: "This Weirdly Realistic Human Typeface Will Leave You Traumatized" (source: Huffington Post)

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that for the majority of people, no typeface will leave them traumatized. Why is an adverb thrown in there, seemingly arbitrarily? (My guess is the headline flows better. Plus, now we know it's not only traumatizing, it's also weird). What even is a human typeface? That's a legitimate question, but does it combat the fact that you couldn't care less about a typeface that you'll never see, never use, and is no technically better than a bit of high-tech clip-art? It doesn't. But in case it does, better click. (Spoiler: It's typeface colored like white human skin with eyeballs on it. Looks a bit like muppets. Not traumatizing.)

9: "Another Monster Mother, But, Hey, She Means Well" (source: NPR)

This is actually an interesting review on a movie, and I'm glad I read it. But I only clicked on it because I'm looking for stupid headlines, and seeing one from NPR surprised me. From this hed, we can't see that it's a review, that it's for a movie, or basically anything about this story. What constitutes a "monster mother?" What constitutes a mother "meaning well?" Have any children been harmed? Is this real life? (That's actually not a question because the reader assumes the headline references something (though what, exactly, we don't know) that happened in real life.

8: "Graduation Surprise Video Saves Biggest News for Last" (source: Huffington Post)

Guys, you guys. This couple graduated college and are also expecting. And they made a corny video about it. No one else has ever done this. Ever.

7: "WestJet Christmas Surprise Will Make You Believe in Santa" (source: Mashable)

This is a great example because the story went wide, with many, many informative headlines like "Airline Asks Passengers What They Want for Christmas, Delivers Gifts at Baggage Claim", "WestJet Finds Out What Passengers Want For Christmas, Leaves Presents At Baggage Claim (VIDEO)". The difference? The first headline got 1.59 million shares on Facebook. The other two got 10,000 and 95,000 respectively. (While I'm just a blogger and can't really control for popularity of website, I tried to choose stories that ran on the same day, by publications with roughly the same number of subscribers).

And even I find the first headline the most compelling. I'm not saying we shouldn't (well, sometimes, but not in this case), but I am wondering why a headline that is basically a teaser (again, in this case, unlike the typeface one, a good teaser), that tells us virtually nothing about the story, and makes assumptions about us as readers do so well. We spend so much of our internet breath telling marketers and other people that they don't even know our lives and shouldn't try to tell us about ourselves, and yet, when a headline does it, we're like, HUH?! SOMETHING COULD MAKE ME BELIEVE IN SANTA? (And we know it can't). WHAT COULD BE THAT COMPELLING TO ME? THANK YOU FOR TELLING ME WHAT I AM COMPELLED BY.

I'm just saying, I don't get it, is all.

6: Blah blah blah Blow Your Mind (source: Everywhere.)


- 65 Amazing Facts That Will Blow your Mind (source: MentalFloss). Not only will they blow your mind, they're also amazing. And they're facts! About what? Are they related? We don't know. Better click.

- 10 Optical Illusions That Will Blow Your Mind (source: Huffington Post). Spoiler: They don't.

- Facts about Walmart to Blow Your Mind (source: Business Insider). This seems fairly legit, to be honest. I bet they could have headlined this with intelligence and people still would have clicked.

6b: blah blah blah mindblowing blah (source: Everywhere)

- 11 Mindblowing Facts That Will Completely Change Your Perspective on the World (source: Huffington Post). OMG, STOP.

- 29 Mind-blowing Coincidences You Won't Believe Happened (source: Cracked). Well, that's repetitive, isn't it? And chances are your mind will not be blown and you actually will believe these things happened, since someone is going to tell you they did, then back that shit up with citation.

- 9 Out of 10 Americans Are Completely Wrong about This Mind-blowing Fact (source: Upworthy). You know, I didn't know there were degrees of wrong, really. But okay, completely wrong. And not only will the fact blow your mind (whatever genre of "fact" it is), but also, EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG ABOUT IT. Click quick! Then you can be smarter than 9 out of 10 people.



You know, I was going to do ten of these, but my eyes are already crossed. I'll do the next five in a follow-up post. Good day to you, internet clickers. I said GOOD DAY.



 

The Great Christmas Cookie Extravaganza

Sometimes the Christmas spirit is so big it gets the better of everyone, taking it to slightly ridiculous proportions. This is a tale of one of those times.

It started with a batch of Christmas cookies.

Actually, let's go back before that. My second semester of grad school had just ended and I'd just written cumulatively about 90 pages of research. I was (and still am) tired of writing. I suddenly had all this free time, and yet my main time-waster (yelling at all of you on the internet) was not appealing to me. But, huzzah! It's Christmas. And I come from an Italian family with special Italian recipes.

I decided to bake.

But, when I bake, I liveblog on facebook. Because we live in 2013 and I do what I want. Anyway, I posted a picture of my first batch of cookies.

It was no big deal. It's Christmas, lots of people are posting cookies. Aside from a few curious "but why are you putting colored sugar on bagels? questions" people were mostly

The same day, I made another batch.

A few more people liked and commented this time, because I barely can bake two things in a week, never mind a day. Plus, who makes cookies shaped like S?

The final thing I posted that day garnered a bit more attention, and set the wheels in motion for what I was about to accidentally do.

People seemed to be pretty excited about the mint fudge. Enough so that I got a few joking requests for packages. But that didn't seem like a bad idea, actually. I mean, I was baking a lot of food.

The next day, the peanut butter fudge continued the streak. People were freely commenting now. In fact, some of my friends asked me if everything was okay. Like, what was the deal with all these baked goods? Very, very, unlike me. But what is like me is that I'm frenetic and I'm over the top. So, in that way, at least it was fitting.

In the next few days, we made sugar cookies and pignoli cookies as well.

While the idea had taken seed during the pictures leading up to the finished product, the project actually began as I stepped back and took a look at my handiwork. In three days' time, I'd made about 50 dozen cookies and 15 pounds of fudge. Surely, I had way too much.

So, I opened it up for real. If anyone wanted cookies, I posted, they should comment with what they want and I would send it to them. Throughout the day, responses trickled in. I ended up with about thirty requests!

Great! Except I did the math, and Santa's budget this year had enough in it for ten packages. Welp, what can you do? I posted that ten people would receive packages, and I would draw the names out of a hat (my trusty fedora, lol). If anyone wanted to pay their own shipping, I said, they would get cookies, and if their name had been drawn, they would essentially have gifted cookies to someone else, as I'd be able to pull another name.

Makes sense.

Now, knowing my friends the way I do, I don't know why I didn't expect what happened next, but it took me entirely by surprise.

People started donating money (like, a lot of money) to my paypal, so I could afford to ship cookies to everyone who signed up. $20 here, $50 there, $80 from over there. What? In fact, people gave so much that I even had enough to ship a few packages to England and Canada, which basically costs, like, a golden calf or some shit.

It was moving. It was incredible. It was Christmas.

And suddenly I had a lot more work to do. Because apparently all the cookies I thought I had were not an infinite number and after giving packages to school teachers, neighbors, friends and helpers throughout the year, I was...out of cookies and fudge.

So I had to make everything again. Phew. I did it, though, and in just a day and a half, because seriously, how much time can one devote to cookies? (unless one is a baker, of course).

But I wasn't nearly done. Next I had to collect everyone's addresses. I hand wrote them all in a notebook (which I later used for shipping paper...so some of you are getting old notes on how much money Catholic Charities needed to secure in 2010 and some of you are getting notes on how to quantitatively survey people for research. Sorry about that). Then I had to make out the cards. Because you can't send cookies without a card. And you can't send a card without saying something personal. So, I spent a little time on them, you could say.

Then I packaged all the orders up, and taped the correct card to the correct bag this morning.

At this point, online, people were really rooting for this project. They asked for updates and readily explained it to others who had just seen one or two statuses about it. There was an excitement to it that I can't recreate here. There was a true Cookie Operation going on, and no one wanted to see it fail.

I got to the post office around noon. I was in my oldest tee shirt. One from my high school graduation that's oversized, and baggy, and says "What a long, strange trip it's been".  And yoga pants. Of course, yoga pants. Because I was going to the post office on a Monday at noon to make up 30 boxes, address them, and send them. That was an acceptable outfit.

Except today (yesterday, since I'm going to post this tomorrow) happened to be the busiest mailing day of the entire year. And the local news station was there to document this historic happening.

Fantastic.

I stand at the counter, trying not to look too interesting (normally I'd be all over it, but shirt. Pants. And I'm not sure I'd even brushed my hair). But eventually, since I'd been there, taking out cookies, measuring them, making boxes, packing them, and then labeling them with a really squeaky permanent marker (God, I am so annoying), the report came timidly over.

"Would you mind if I interviewed you?" she asked. "Whatever you're doing...it looks...interesting."

I posted the pic of the finished packages and told everyone we would be on the news, and they didn't believe me. Because, honestly, really?

But, yes, that's how I became the lead story (dying laughing forever) on the local news at 6 p.m. on December 16th. Because I made a bunch of cookies, and some of my friends wanted some, and some of my other friends helped pay for them to get there.

Someday I will do something normal. Today was not that day.



GTN - Gainesville Television Network


 

Before You Laugh, T.H.I.N.K. - Guest Post

Tracey, who blogs over at Inside the Mommyvan, really brings up some good points about pictures and pages we usually don't think twice about laughing at.

...



I've noticed lately certain things that once seemed like a great idea now make me squirm inside my own skin... and no, I don't mean unearthing photos of that ill-advised spiral perm I got in 1983. I'm talking about some of the humor out there that, for me, crosses a line. Not racist, or sexist, or any of the many other -ist lines whose specific boundazries are argued daily both on- and off-line. No, this is subtler still, and yet something that affects us all. So, here goes...

People of Walmart.

"A photo collection of people that grace us with their presence at Walmart." Hope you never have a bad hair day, or a child care or health or wardrobe emergency, or, God forbid, a mental illness or disability, and then need to run an errand. You might just find yourself on the wrong end of a camera lens at Wal-Mart.

 Rich Kids of Instagram.

"They have more money than you and this is what they do." You probably have more money than lots of other people. Do you have a nicer car? A bigger TV? Better clothes? Take a vacation now and then? Or do you, unlike these foolish children, spend money _only_ on the necessities of life?

 Awkward Family Photos. "Awkward Family Photos reminds anyone with a dusty shoebox full of snapshots of unfortunate fashion choices, band trips, braces, bad bridesmaids’ dresses and that one time you got talked into dressing up and going to the Renaissance Faire, that you are not alone. This isn’t just a book, it’s a public service on the page, a living, breathing, laugh-out-loud reminder that no matter how badly you dressed, how oddly you posed, and how weird Uncle Dave who lived in the basement was, somebody out there had it worse." (from the book description)

Public service? I don't buy it. Admit it, it's an excuse to laugh at people funnier-looking than you are, people who made the mistake of capturing what was to them a treasured memory, on film. I've focused on these websites because they're ones I see often, floating around Facebook and the like, but there are plenty of off-line examplesas well:

• That lady (really shouldn't be) wearing a bikini top / thise shorts / that dress in public.
• Can you believe those people dragging their grubby kids around the store at 11pm?
• Look at that jerk with the fancy car, he must be compensating for something (wink, wink).
• Who would ever think that pose / belly cast / framed placenta would make a nice pregnancy keepsake?

It is a fine line, though, isn't it? Let's try a few more.

• Look at that girl, her clothes don't even match. Doesn't she own a mirror?
• Hey, lady, get that whiny rugrat out of the coffeeshop (all he did was ask for a chocolate milk).
• Ooooh, pink hair, bet you think you're sooo unique.
• What a dork, he can't even catch a football.
• Did she really think she had a shot at cheerleading (with those thunder thighs or she's flat as a board)?

Can you see where this is going? I hope so, because I'm not going to spell out the next step. Don't get me wrong, I love to laugh as much as the next person, and some of these are funny. Some of them are also offensive hurtful, and unkind. This is where the line comes in. Once we get past the blatantly insulting, what we say isn't what crosses the line. It's not even who we say it to or where. It's how, and more importantly, why that pushes it over from good fun into... something else.

The line is in my heart.

Am I laughing at someone who has offered up their own awkwardness or misfortune as humor (as with at least some of the Awkward Family Photos, the best comedians, and good ol' America's Funniest Videos), or at someone held up by a third party as laughable? Am I laughing out of sympathy and camaraderie, or out of malice, jealousy, arrogance, or spite?

The line is in my heart.

We all think things from time to time that are better left unspoken. Bullying is a terrible problem among teens and even young children. Even adults can be terribly cruel to each other, perhaps without even being aware of it.

At the same time, I don't want us to turn into a society of humorless drones, never poking friendly fun lest we bruise someone's ego. I think most people can figure out, in their own heart, which side of the line their words are coming from. The line is in your heart, too. If you find yourself about to say something like, "Lighten up!" or "Can't you take a joke?" you probably crossed the line. The right move here is to apologize. Immediately. No ifs, ands, or buts (especially not buts). Think back to what you said, and why, and make a mental note: That was Not OK. If it's a one-off thing, maybe it was a misunderstanding or someone especially sensitive. If you start to see a pattern, take another look at the line, the one in your heart, and give it a nudge toward the kinder, gentler side. Isn't this what we want to teach our kids? Regardless of how you tell them to treat others, they will follow the behavior your model for them. If you tease, pick on, or bully, they will too.

So, before you speak, THINK: T - Is it true? H - Is it helpful? I - Is it inspiring? N - Is it necessary? K - Is it kind?



 

Ladies: Hugo Schwyzer's Life Is Not Your Fault

Have you heard about Hugo Schwyzer taking a break from the feminist internet? If you're anyone who has eyes, you've read about it. He made sure of it. He posted on his own blog about it, gave an interview immediately with New York Magazine about it, and his pals over at The Atlantic did a nice little tribute, too.

Hugo Schwyzer is not one to go gentle into that good night.

He's leaving, and he wants you all to know that it's because you're such meanie heads. Yes, you. Posting your snarky tweets about his freelance gigs, commenting your agitated words underneath his writing. Can't a man speak for women and just be left alone?

He also mentions his fragile mental health and his marital problems, most likely stemming from his recent affair (with someone super important in feminist circles, guys. But, shh! Don't be interested in that. But if you hear about who he banged, don't be surprised. Tee hee.) as reasons for his departure.

I'd like to take these issues one by one, and explain to you that Hugo Schwyzer's life is not your fault, regardless of what he implies.

First, though, let's get through the most important point: This is not about whether or not men can be feminist leaders, or outspoken in feminist spaces.

This is not about whether or not men can be feminist leaders, or outspoken in feminist spaces.

It's not about that.

Don't get confused. Everyone seems to get confused. For the purpose of this piece, I am fully on the side of men being able to speak out on feminist issues if they so choose. I do not want to debate the intricacies of men leading women in their own movement right now. Because it's not about that.

This is about personal responsibility and accountability, and honestly, about personality, full stop.

Don't cloud the issue or make it more important than it is by including the overarching theme of men in women's spaces. This is about Hugo Schwyzer in women's spaces, and whether or not he personally should be looked at as a leading male voice in the feminist movement. It doesn't have to do with what he is (a man). It has to do with what he does.

Okay, let's start with his personal goodbye letter, shall we?

His first sentence casts blame on the online world for his departure. "The toxicity of take-down culture is exhausting and dispiriting. The cheapest and easiest tweets and articles to compose are snarky and clever dismantlings of what someone else has worked hard to create. The defenders of this culture of fierceness call it intellectual honesty, but it is an honesty too often edged in cruelty."

You know what the problem is? It's that the snarky tweeters aren't thinking about what happens on the other end of their writing. Much like Schwyzer didn't think about the consequences of his essay coming out as a character in a murder-suicide plot to those who were working with him at the time. Funding was lost, reputations out the window, as these people who spent long, hard hours erecting safe spaces for women (like Scarlateen, for example) became aware of a violent past that had been previously and deviously hidden from them standing by them, holding their hands. That's what honesty edged in cruelty looks like.

However, in his NY Mag interview, Schwyzer has apparently forgotten the comfort he called for, saying, "There is this false notion in feminism that the Internet is supposed to be a safe space. There's this confusion of the therapeutic and the public space. Is the Internet a safe space? No."

Bingo. This is not your safe space. When you write something publicly, you open yourself up to criticism. Period. I expect to be criticized for this piece. I'm not going to whine about it, though. Because I understand that the internet is not a safe space. Not like, say, my therapist's office or my local women's center (thanks, by the way, for helping me find my woman safe spaces, Hugo.)

Here's another issue with that: While the internet itself is not a safe space, there are safe spaces within the internet. There are women who band together in more private groupings to discuss issues pertinent to them without expecting to be attacked or exposed. We need to keep those distinctions drawn.

And since the interview for NY Mag is definitely not a safe space, let's take a look at this gem:

"If you look at the men who are writing about feminism, they toe the line very carefully. It's almost like they take their cues from the women around them."

Huzzah! This is exactly as it should be, as the oppressed group is probably the group that knows what's going on. But, please, continue.

"Men are afraid of women's anger. It's very hard for men to stand up to women's anger."

And this is where I officially lost it. Do I even exist in the same universe as Hugo Schwyzer? In what realm of reality is that even close to a true statement? Honestly, I can't, because reasons, so I won't. But wow. For someone who has marked a prolific and successful career in women's studies and feminism, this unveils a huge problem in feminism today. When even the most entrenched of advocates go the "you women are too angry" route, it blatantly emphasizes how very easy it is to miss the point.

The point being twofold. 1) Women have very good reason to be angry, if they even are. 2) It's not about you, dude. Feminism is not about Hugo Schwyzer. It just isn't. And had he backed away in a respectable manner, having realized that maybe it wasn't his words on the matter or his position in the space that was the issue but instead his insatiable need to self-aggrandize, well, then, I wouldn't be writing this piece. But instead, he chose the most vocal of ways to exit the stage. And I take issue with that.

This is not a movie in which Hugo Schwyzer is the leading actor. Everything about this man is showy. Who is paying attention to him? Who is tweeting about him? Who is publishing him (or not)?

What happened to the content of the writing? That's what's important here, the messages being sent, not the producer of those messages.

And it's important to note that I like Schwyzer's writing. But no matter how many times people confuse the two, his talents are not himself.

You can be a man in feminism. You can be a man who slept with his students in feminism. You can be a man who cheated on his wife in feminism. You can be a man who was addicted to drugs and alcohol and be in feminism. You can be a man who once tried to murder his girlfriend and be in feminism. You can be a man who uses all of these experiences as freelance fodder and be in feminism.

I firmly believe in all of those statements.

But you cannot be a man who slept with his students, cheated on his wife, was addicted to drugs and alcohol, tried to murder his girlfriend, and used all those things as freelance fodder, who also cannot extrapolate himself from the feminist messages, which, by virtue of their nature call for the spotlight to be on women and their issues, not on Hugo Schwyzer.

There is nothing meek here, nothing apologetic, and nothing learned. The educational value of writing through "the lens of his experiences" is tarnished by his self-centered ambition.

When you use a message to further your own self, and your own ambitions, regardless of whom it hurts (those people usually being women), you are not a feminist leader. When you further come at your critics by muddying the issues and making their reasonable dissent about you being a man, and not your actions as that man, you are not even an advocate anymore.

Schwyzer is "sad and hurt by a culture in which what we say online is policed by clever cynicism masquerading as progressive outrage."

I am sad and hurt that my clever cynicism is looked at as something that is not deserved. I'm sad and hurt that women cannot be outraged at actions without being told they're too angry and they should take it to their local women's shelters. I'm sad and hurt that in an age where we need to be talking about the feminist movement in terms of where we go from here, and when we especially need to make the new battles of women known (such as rape-culture, slut-shaming, etc. -- see, I also took Feminism 101, HS) we're stuck writing essays about men who are leaving the feminist space because we're all too mean. I'm sad and hurt that yet again it comes back to the men.

But I didn't spend my whole post on that. Because feminism is not about me. And it's certainly not about Hugo Schwyzer.


**If you'd like to know more about why you just had to read all that, click here.
 

The End of the Spammers?

I've posted before about the hilarious spam messages I receive on this blog.

Gems like:

"I think this is one of the such a lot important information for me.
And i'm satisfied reading your article. However wanna remark on few general things, The website taste is great, the articles is in reality great : D. Just right job, cheers
My web page: how to get rid of acne scars "

"That is really attention-grabbing, You are a very 
skilled blogger. I've joined your feed and sit up for seeking more of your excellent post. Additionally, I have shared your web site in my social networks
Also visit my web page ... how to get your Ex back "

and

"Somebody essentially lend a hand to make seriously articles I 
would state. This is the first time I frequented your web 
page and thus far? I surprised with the research you made to create this actual put up amazing.

Excellent activity!
My webpage ; buy youtube views"

keep coming.

I laugh.

Now, I had been allowing these spam comments for two reasons.

1) Captcha is annoying.

2) Some of these commenters are real people making, like, three pennies per comment or something. And who am I to deny them their income? They're only looking ridiculous on older posts anyway.

But then I got a comment that said something along the lines of this:

"Blah blah ridiculous, nonsensical blather. Does your site have a spam problem? View my webpage."

And I was like, well, it didn't until you drew it to my attention. Now, I'm thinking, jeez, if the spammers are asking if I've got a spam problem, it's probably time to bite the bullet and rid myself of these leeches.

(No offense, leeches.)

Even without that snarky spam comment, the number of links left on old blog entries is getting up to a half dozen a day.

This is everyone's problem. Moderation, yo. When you descend upon something so surely and with no reprieve, you're going to be stopped where otherwise, had you exercised just a little judgement, held back just a tad, you'd be left alone to attempt to entice people with your stupid links.

Unfortunately for you, I'll now be taking care of my "spam problem."

Thanks for bringing it to my attention, bots.

But before I do, here are a few more gems for you all:

"When someone writes an article he/she retains the image of a user in his/her brain that how a user can be 
aware of it. Therefore that's why this article is perfect. Thanks!
Here is my web-site :: buy Youtube views " 

(This one is extra good because it's on a post about shepherd's pie. Hah.)

"What's up, every time i used to check weblog posts here early in the daylight, for the reason that i like to gain knowledge of more and more.
my web site :: clean my pc "

Okay, I have to stop copy and pasting these before I change my mind about strengthening my security.

They're so hilarious; I really quite like them.


 

Guest Post - How to Protect your Kids from Social Networking Sites

Today I have a guest blogger talking about social networking and what parents can do to keep their kids safe.


Social networking has taken over the world and has redefined the way that we interact with the people around the world. It has made it possible to keep in touch with a large number of people at the same time. Social networks have also proved to be a favorite past-time for children who use these websites to play games, answer fun quizzes, and interact with their friends and relatives. However, there is a dark side to social network websites. There are many hoaxes targeted to exploit the naïve mind of the young children. This has considerably increased the job of the parents in terms of supervision of their children. While it is easy to keep an eye on what the children are doing physically, it can prove to be extremely challenging to monitor the online activities of children without being overbearing.

You do not need to take harsh measures like restricting your children to use social networking websites altogether. You can follow the guidelines below to handle this concern in a positive and effective manner.

Discuss privacy with your children

The first and foremost thing that you have to do is to educate your children regarding online privacy. It is a fundamental issue and should be given same importance, like the topics of drugs and sex. You have to be frank with them and tell them about the problems that could arise if they share personal information with unreliable parties.

Try to be involved

There is a significant generation gap when it comes to technology. The younger generation seems to have an inborn affinity to latest technology. They are quick to adopt the latest trend and work hard to stay up to date. However, this can also lead them to adopt unhealthy habits like sharing private information online. The social networking websites have somehow instilled a penchant of narcissism in us. We like to share every detail about us – be it what we are eating, where we are going, what we are doing, which song we are listening to etc. This behavior can be dangerous if your child is not taking care about what information he/she is sharing and to whom this information is visible. You can guide your child by being genuinely interested in their online life. Once you appreciate what they are doing, they are more likely to be more open to you about their activities. However, if you try to control them by strictly monitoring their activities, you are more likely to do more harm than good, because your child would become more secretive in order to avoid trouble.

‘Friend’ your child

This is the best way to be ‘with’ your child on a social network website. Furthermore, it will also instill consciousness in them as they will be aware that all the information that they share will be visible to you. Social network sites may pose some challenges when it comes to protecting your child but if you can take the right steps, you can easily handle it.



Mike is a regular blogger with a strong interst in child development and education. Mike has 2 children, who love the internet, facebook and other social networking sites. Aside from blogging, Mike enjoys playing with his children with their furby toys.

Paid Link Foolishness

After you've had a blog for a while, people start to find you. And they leave comments. Awesome comments like:

"This book is a godsend to women everywhere. Sometimes, getting a liposuction Orange County for health reasons is a good idea, though."

"I thought dental x-ray are bad for kids, but thanks for sharing anyway. Now that I have the idea, I'll bring my son to the nearest cosmetic dentist Sydney clinic to see how healthy his teeth are."

Because a book about eating well works well with a link for liposuction, and kids obviously need cosmetic dental work. What?

If you've got a minute and would like a laugh, check out the comments on What I Learned at the Pediatric Dentist.

Spammers are eating that post up.

Now, I don't take them down because I don't particularly care. I've seen the employers that contract this kind of work out for pennies. If someone wants to make ten cents by putting a useless link in the comment section of my blog, who am I to withhold that dime from them? (Assuming the link has to stay up for them to be paid. I don't know anything about this.)

It's not like anyone is going to click on them, or that they take away from any of the content (if you can call stories about my kids and the occasional rant at a news article content) here.

I'll leave you with one of my particular favorites.

"She's been through a messy room but it never fails her to be happy. This pictures should be printed and framed on the wall.
digital cameras"

It almost makes sense. Almost.

___
If you like this blog, please vote for it here at Babble's Top 100 Blogs list. It would mean the world to me. 

Facebook in all its Infinite Wisdom, on Spanking

Facebook strikes again. Have you seen this in your feed?

"Have to laugh at people who are against smacking. My parents sometimes smacked me when I was naughty. . .I didn't hate them. . .I didn't have trust issues with them because of it. . .I didn't fear them. . .But I definitely respected them! I learned what my boundaries were, and knew what would happen if I broke them. . .I wasn't abused, I was disciplined. . .SINCE WE TOOK THIS SOFT APPROACH LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY & YOUNGSTERS *Re-post if you got your ass smacked and survived."

Thanks, Facebook, yet again, for your sage, all-encompassing knowledge on this topic. You sure showed us. 

JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW, USING CAPITAL LETTERS GETS YOUR POINT ACROSS IN AN INTELLIGENT AND PERSUASIVE WAY.

See how much attention you just paid to that sentence? Obviously it works. 

Since the original poster of this message clearly wanted us to pay the most attention to the caps, let's start with that. Since we took this soft approach, look what happened to our country and youngsters.

I'm sorry. What exactly has happened to our youngsters that is a direct result of parents not hitting them? I'm pretty sure the state of our youth is the same as it was when I was a kid, in terms of that youth itself. It's the society that has changed. And who is responsible for that society? The people who "were smacked and survived." Of course, this argument only works if I'm willing to admit that spanking has had a direct entire cultural effect on the nation. Which I don't think it has. Whether or not it's bad for the particular child in question is a raging debate, and I happen to think it can be very bad. There are other ways to discipline. But whether or not you spank your child, I don't think you're responsible for THE STATE OF OUR COUNTRY (see what I did there?).

They're two different issues. Can discipline techniques as children grow up affect their adulthood decisions? Yes. Can those decisions affect the state of the country? Yes, eventually. Is not spanking responsible for the economic trouble, the housing bubble bursting, the drugs on the street, the oppression of whole groups of people just trying to get by? I don't think it is. That's quite the stretch, Facebook writer. 

Now to address the rest of the message. I think it's just great that you respect and appreciate your parents and their disciplining methods. It's clearly left you open-minded and accepting of others, which in turn makes you a good person. Oh wait.

There is a huge difference between sticking up for the methods that you use or that your parents used, and lashing out offensively at those who do things differently. How do you know those parents who do not hit their children aren't properly disciplining them? They know what works for their family, just like your parents knew what worked for yours.

Did you think you were going to bully parents into hitting their kids? What is the point of this message? There is no point. You're certainly not changing the tide of the country or our youth's problems. You just wanted to prove how tough you were? How much pain you could take as a kid? How much better a person you are because you were spanked? Do you think being spanked or spanking makes you a better person than those who do not practice that form of discipline? Pointing and laughing while making huge generalizations definitely helps get your point across, I would say.  I look at a message like that and think, damn, spanking really does work! Look at the kind-hearted, mature adults it's reared. If only everyone I know could be like this person.

I guess my biggest message with this post isn't pro or anti spanking. It's more along the lines of this: Facebook can easily make you look pretty stupid. Try not to take the bait. Just because someone got their "ass smacked and survived" doesn't mean they agree with this trite and twisted message. 


___
If you like this blog, please vote on Babble.com. Tales of an Unlikely Mother is number 18, just scroll down and click on the thumbs up! Thank you so, so much. 

The Mom Pledge - Guest Blog

Becoming Supermommy alerted me a while back to the Mom Pledge, an idea I really like and needed to know more about. She graciously agreed to write a post for me explaining the pledge and what it means to all of us.

____

I’m not the creator of the Mom Pledge.  I’m just a mom, and a champion for it.  You see, there are bullies all over the place, we just don’t usually call them that.

I remember being a kid.  I was weird.  I was awkward.  I had huge hair, gigantic glasses, and a crooked smile.  I was a teacher’s pet, a know-it-all.  I never got in trouble, I always had my hand in the air.  My family were vegetarians, so I always had strange or exotic foods (by lunchroom standards) in my lunch sack, “Vruit” juice boxes and Baybel minis replaced Capri Suns and lunchables.  I was one of a half dozen Jewish kids in my whole school, and another two were my sisters.  In short, I was bullied mercilessly.

My parents would repeat, over and over, the same explanations for why I would come home from school heartbroken and miserable.  “Kids are mean,” they’d say.  “But one day they’ll grow up and stop being so mean.”  The implication was that bullying is a childhood phenomena, and that once you outgrow your childhood, you outgrow bullying.

Nowadays, I’ve resigned myself to the idea that I’m a grown-up.  I must be, after all I’m approaching 30 at a steady pace, I have children, I do a fairly good job behaving as a responsible member of society.  I don’t always feel like an adult, but for the sake of argument I’ll agree that I am.  And I’m still being bullied.

Not by other kids, but by other moms.

At first, this seemed absolutely absurd.  Adults?  Bullying each other?  Surely not!  But they do.

Each mother is fairly certain that what they’re doing for their child(ren) is the right thing to do.  Unfortunately, many mothers don’t leave it at that.  For many mothers, the choice by another mom to parent differently is an indictment.  And in their defensive angst, they attack.

Moms gang up and bully other moms for not homeschooling.

For vaccinating or not vaccinating.

For circumcising.

For choosing to hide the gender of their children.

For raising their children in a specific faith.

For NOT raising their children in a specific faith.

For what the feed or don’t feed their kids.

For how they dress their kids.

For what they name their kids.

For the way they gave birth.

For nursing too long or not nursing at all.

For watching some or no television.

For having a family structure they don’t agree with.

Every detail of parenting is personal, and therefore every parent takes the conversation about parenting personally.  And when you get personal, things can get ugly.

It’s said that you should never talk about religion or politics in polite company.  I would add parenting to that list.  It’s a hot button topic.

But the fact of the matter is that we DO talk about parenting.  The mommy blogosphere is HUGE- there are MILLIONS of moms across the world blogging about being a mom.  Blogging about their parenting choices.

And because the internet is perfect for connecting moms to other like minded moms, it’s easy to form a mob.  Easy to organize a few moms into a horde of enraged bullies who attack another mother until she shuts down her blog, changes her aliases, or abandons the blogosphere altogether.

And that is a terrible thing.

We don’t all have to agree.  I don’t know a single mom who hasn’t made a choice for their kids that I disagree with.  Not in the real world, and not online.  And that’s because we all have to make the choices that work best for OUR lives, for OUR families.  And the fact that we make particular choices does not give us the right to attack anyone else for disagreeing with us.

That’s why I took The Mom Pledge.  And that’s why I urge you to do the same.  Pledge not to allow your online space to be somewhere that people are attacked or attack others.  Pledge to facilitate conversations, not mobs.  Pledge to treat other moms, no matter what their parenting choices, with respect.

Because we’re all moms.  We all know how hard it is.  How much work children are.  How gratifying every milestone can be, how each step they take towards maturity makes you beam with pride and still breaks your heart.  How everything you do, you do to make sure that they have a good life.  A life at least as good as your own, but hopefully better.

That’s all any of us want for our kids.  Whether we vaccinate or not, circumcise or not, home school or not, no matter what we teach them about God or Science or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. 

Our kids grow up, they go into the world and have to make friends with other people.  And they pick up lessons we don’t even know we’re giving them.  If we, as moms, attack each other, our kids will learn to attack each other.  And so on.  But if we treat each other, always, with respect and consideration, our kids will not grow into bullies.  They’ll see that grown-ups do not engage in that awful behavior, and as they have since their earliest months, they will want to make us proud by being LIKE us.

So let’s be the best examples we can be.  Let’s stand together, despite all our disagreements, for an world that is an improvement over the world in which we grew up.  Let’s take The Mom Pledge together, support each other in the exhausting and difficult endeavor of raising children, and let’s put a stop to mommy bullying.

For more information, visit The Mom Pledge.

____

Lea, aka Becoming SuperMommy, is a writer, painter, chef and costumer, dabbling in the all consuming chaos that is motherhood.  She and her husband try to maintain their happiness and harmony through an unceasing sense of the absurd.  The twin toddlers seem to help with that.  In a family where both parents are cancer survivors, both returning to school in the down economy, and both practicing different religions, they manage to keep things interesting enough that Lea never ceases to have something to share with her readers.  While still becoming, well, SuperMommy.

___

If you like this blog, please consider voting for me here! And if you really love me...Babble is the most important ranking to me, and I'd love you forever.  xxoo

Tales of an Unlikely Mother is on Babble.com. We're number 14, just scroll down and click on the thumbs up