Category: Current Events

Categories
Current Events

Is This Progress?

Like millions of other Americans, I am following the presidential election.  I don’t have a candidate that I feel really will make a difference when it is all said and done.  It seems to me most politicians say and promise one thing when campaigning, but seldom follow through on these promises once elected. 

I will admit that I was happy after 219 years; there was finally a woman, Hillary Clinton, who was running for her party’s nomination for president.  It has been a long-time coming.  I can’t say that I agree with everything Clinton has done in her political career, but it was a historical event.  One might even argue that it finally meant women were closer to breaking through that ever-present glass ceiling. 

I believed a candidate for president with Clinton’s political background would be deemed a serious contender, and would be taken seriously, despite the fact that she is indeed a woman.  It seemed like this was real progress for women in our country. 

As the campaign played out, it has been obviously clear that this campaign has been anything but progress for women.  It has appalled and shocked me, how Senator Hillary Clinton has been portrayed by the media-mainly because she is a woman. Here are just a few of the countless examples:

Whether you would vote for Sen. Clinton or not, the issue is when the media is allowed to refer to her and women in general, by these degrading and sexist terms.  It illustrates how women are perceived and thought of.  This is blatant sexism, misogyny, and gender discrimination. 

How outraged would we be, the media included, if Olbermann had stated that Sen. Obama needed to be taken into a room by someone, where he (Obama) wouldn’t come out- clearly referring to being severely beaten?  When did it become acceptable to talk about beating a woman to the point where she would be so injured, she would be physically unable to move?  Or what if Kristol had said, “…black men are a problem?” 

The outrage would be deafening.   It would be pouring in from the political left and right- male and female.  As a nation we do not tolerate racial comments about a person or group’s race or sexual orientation.  Yet, when the media constantly speaks this way about a woman and a mother, it is not the outrage that is deafening, it is the silence.

Silence from people and organizations that ought to be taking a stand against this type of sexism and misogyny.  Where are the people and groups who normally stand up against this behavior?  Why are these types of comments not reprimanded immediately, and why do comments like this continue, over and over again? 

I am very disappointed, disillusioned, and wonder why more people- the media, politicians, political leaders, activists, and the other candidates for president, do not protest and speak out against these blatant sexist and gender attacks against Sen. Clinton, and in turn women everywhere?

The fact that none of these groups or individuals has denounced this type of speech against Clinton shows that they have no interest in working to disperse these sexist attitudes and remarks. It seems like this could have been a monumental stand for the other candidates to make.  What better way to show that you will work for all people when they are unfairly criticized, and judged.  In Clinton’s case, all of this hostility for more or less-being a woman?

Why stand quietly by when a colleague is continually called a “bi**h” and worse by the media numerous times?  Why not disown and condemn this type of sexism?  After Sen. Obama’s own pastor made comments that were not appropriate, Obama strongly denounced him.  I question why Sen. Obama chooses not to do the same denouncing this type of misogyny against women? Sen. John McCain has also remained silent on this issue. 

The fact is, this type of sexism and misogyny has not only happened over and over again to Sen. Clinton in the media, but it happens countless times to women every day in America.  A well publicized example happened just last week, when Sen. Obama called a female reporter “sweetie.”  

Instead of the issue being the obvious sexism in this type of comment, Obama himself said, “It’s a bad habit of mine.”  The issue is downplayed and brushed off by the media as a term of endearment.   The women who have spoken against this, and who are offended by this “term of endearment,” are portrayed as being overly sensitive, and irrational.   What would the media have said about Clinton if she had called a male reporter ‘honey,’ or ‘sweetie?’  How many women would still have their jobs, if their “bad habit” was calling their male colleagues ‘sweetie?’ Could the double standard here, be any more apparent? 

The silence on this very real issue has spoken volumes to me on the values of our so called “leaders,” and presidential candidates.  I believe real leaders for change would not let these sexist attitudes continue to foster and even contribute to the problem by remaining silent, and using their own inappropriate terms when addressing women.   It is very easy to speak about great things, and great change, but a totally different thing to live by those words, day in and day out, when a real issue is on the line.

When as a country, we allow a presidential nominee candidate (who happens to be a woman) to be called a bi**h, whore, and worse over and over again, or allow a presidential nominee candidate (who happens to be a man) to call a woman doing her job, sweetie, and we remain silent- what does that say about us?  What does that say to our children- the next generation- our sons and daughters about the value of women in our society?

As much as things have changed, and progress has been made in eliminating sexism, this campaign race has made it very clear how so many things have not changed, especially sexist attitudes towards women in this country. 

Are we still at that point, where a woman running for the nomination for President of the United States, should expect to be called obscenities, cruelly be made fun of, and be judged by her gender- not her accomplishments?  Sadly, I think we are.  Can we call this progress?  I don’t think so.  

~Sexism is a social disease- Author Unknown

Categories
Current Events Little Pumpkin Sweet Pea Designs Mothering

Global Giving- Thank You

About a month ago, I blogged about the Global Giving project BlogHer was running through Mother’s Day to help save impoverished women and children’s lives. I announced that I would donate 50% of my sales from my on-line store, Little Pumpkin, Sweet Pea Designs from that post to today, Mother’s Day to the project.

While the sales weren’t as high as I would have liked- :-), I was able to donate double what I initally thought I could.  Thank you, thank you to everyone who supported this idea, proposed by Amy from Crunchy Domestic Goddess, and a BlogHer Contributing Editor. 

I was torn on which project to donate to, so I ended up donating to two:  I donated to Help Afgan Women Deliver Healthy Babies Safely, and to the Mother & Child Health Clinic in Rural Nepal.

As I wrote before, I feel so blessed to have been born in a country where I don’t have to worry about having access to basic health care.  As I celebrated Mother’s Day today, it really struck me how many less fortunate women and children never even get a chance to have a basic start in life, and have safe, and accessible health care. 

You can still make a donation to these projects, by clicking the links above.  The projects still need your help. The Nepal Mother & Child Clinic is only 7.8% funded, and the Afgan Women Baby Project is only 2.3% funded.  Any amount- as big or as little as you can give will help.

Categories
Current Events Household

Do You Have an “Allowance?”

I have about a half-hour commute to work, twice a week.  I get to listen to what I want to on the radio (no Music Together, Barney, or kiddie music CD’s.)  So I like to listen to the popular talk shows, to stay up on what is happening in the world.

During the past month, I have heard every talk show talking about stay-at-home moms who have or get an “allowance.” This is money their husbands give them to spend each week, and once it is gone, it is gone- no more buying anything.  At first I thought this only applied to a few people, but I was amazed by the calls the radio shows were receiving, and these were all on different stations.

The allowance “rules” based on the women, who called in, seem range from the wife receiving a large allowance to buy groceries, gas, and other household necessities to only $20 a week to buy “emergency” items like diapers, or to splurge on herself. 

One woman said her husband gives her $50 a week for her allowance and with this she has to buy gas, diapers, and formula.  If there is any money left over, she said she can spend it on herself, like on a haircut, or clothes.  She said with gas prices being so high though, she barely has enough of her allowance left after buying gas. 

Another woman said her husband gives her $20 a week that she can spend on whatever she wants for herself, but if she needs money for diapers, or a doctor’s appointment, she has to submit the amount to him ahead of time, and he writes a check for that exact amount.  Some women had to even get trips to the grocery store, dry cleaners, etc. “approved” ahead of time from their husbands, so their husbands would know how much gas they were using. 

The calls went on and on, and evidently there are a lot of households in my area who are doing this.  Some of the women loved it- they said it helped them stay on a budget, but some women said they hated it, but felt like they had little choice, since their husband was the one who was earning the money. 

I’m all for budgeting the household money, and maybe if a wife requests the finances be run this way, I don’t have a problem with it.  Whatever works, if both parties are happy.  I do have a problem with the whole allowance issue if the wife is not happy, or feels like she has no choice in how finances are spent, even if her husband is the sole wage earner.

Stay-at-home moms contribute so much to the family- I am sure I don’t have to list it all out.  To be made to feel like you are a teen-ager asking your father for an allowance, just seems degrading to me.  I am of the thought (and my husband is too), that we both contribute to the household, and we don’t need “permission” to spend money.  Of course we run bigger purchase items by each other, but my husband doesn’t want or demand an accounting of every dollar I spend, and I don’t expect that of him either.

I am really curious now, what do you think about this?  I would love to hear if you have an allowance, if so, is it your choice, and what are the benefits or drawbacks to this. 

Categories
Current Events Household Shopping

Happy Earth Day- Save Some Green

I know there is a lot of information available on how to be “greener,”and the benefits to the environment.  For instance, last year around Earth Day, I vowed to stop using the plastic grocery store bags, and I purchased these Envirosax reusable bags.  Most of the stores in my area started offering plastic bag recycling as well, so there are many places now I can take the plastic bags when they start to accumulate.

This Earth Day I thought it would be interesting to cite some financial information on how much “green” efforts can save you.  Again, all these are good for the Earth too, but it can also be a motivating factor when you see how many “green” backs your “green” efforts are saving you.

  • You can save money by using cloth napkins, and paper towels.  If an average family goes through a standard 250 package of napkins a month, and they are $2.50 a package, in a year the savings would be: $30.  Paper towels are about $3 for a package of two, and assuming you use a package a month, the savings in a year would be: $36.
  • If you can use cloth diapers, (even some of the time) the savings really start to add up and are enormous- especially if you invest in cloth diapers and use them for a second and or third child. 

There are tons of spreadsheets on the Internet breaking down the costs of disposable diapers versus cloth diapers.  Basically in summary, if water is cheap (and in the US it is), there is less of a toll on the environment by using cloth diapers.  The savings seem to work out on average, by the time your first baby is about 10-12 months old, you would have spent the same amount on cloth diapers as you would disposables.  At that point you have broken even, and after that, you have recouped your costs, and are basically diapering for free (minus the cost of water to wash them). 

If you have bought diapers recently, I don’t have to tell you how much of a savings this can be.  Especially if you have two children in diapers at the same time!  If a family uses a case of diapers a month and on average they are about $30 a case, in a year on the low end, that is $360 a year.  If you invest in cloth diapers, after 10-12 months, you will have saved $30-60+, and after that you are saving at least $30+ a month!

  • Buy energy efficient appliances.  Energy Star has a list of qualified products.  Here are just two examples of how much money you can save with Energy Star appliances: Energy Star Refrigerator: $10.82, Energy Star Front-Load Washing Machine: $50.50 (just on the electricity- not counting the savings in water!)  Total for these two appliances: $61.32
  • Unplugging appliances when not in use, can help save on your electricity bill too.
  • By paying your bills on-line, you not only save the costs of stamps to mail your bills, you also save on the costs of checks, by not having to re-order so many.  On average my estimate is you would save about $50 a year by doing this. 
  • Make one meal a week, a vegetarian meal, and save on the cost of meat.  If the average package of meat or chicken costs around $7, in a year you would have saved $364 on meat! 

Just these few tips would save the average household about $574 a year.  You can add to that if you are a family using cloth diapers!  These saving could be several trips to the grocery store, several tanks of gas, several meals out, or even a nice weekend away!

Join me in the coming year to try to be as “green” as possible, and save yourself some “green” at the same time.  If you have any more money saving tips that are good for the Earth too, I would love to hear them.

Happy Earth Day!

Categories
Current Events Health Mothering Parenting Pregnancy & Birth

Does Having A Baby Boy Cause Post-Partum Depression?

I saw this article called, How Depressing: It’s A Boy, today on MSN.  I only had time to scan over it briefly at the time, but being a mother of two boys, and having had suffered from post-partum depression (PPD), three months after Cole was born, of course I was interested in reading the study in detail.

After I read it, I was really upset for a variety of reasons.  For starters, this study only had 17 French women in it.  That is not enough of a sample to say for certain, what this study is suggesting.  Even the article pointed out that the “since the study was conducted on a very small group of women, it is possible the findings are just a statistical quirk.” 

The study also never even asked the women if they were hoping for a particular gender, yet they speculate that at least French mothers may prefer daughters to sons.  This is based on what?  Personal feelings?  There is no science backing this speculation up at all. 

I have known at least six women (myself included) who have suffered from various degrees of PPD over the years.  Four of them have been mothers of girls, and myself and one other mother, have been the mothers of boys.  If this French study studied my circle, they would have the opposite findings. 

For this study to hold any merit whatsoever, they would have to study a variety of women, on a MUCH larger scale, for several years, to see if the statistics they had,  (out of 17 mothers with severe depression, 13 of them had baby boys,) proved to be consistent with different and larger study groups.  I think this study was flawed and didn’t include enough subjects to draw a conclusion like they are claiming- that boys cause PPD. 

Personally, I think a major cause of PPD, is hormonal and a nutrient imbalance.  As soon as I started replenishing my levels of nutrients, especially the B vitamins and Omega-6’s, my depression went away.  I know that isn’t the case for everyone, but I think it is a really far stretch and drawing at straws to say because you have a boy you are at greater risk for PPD. 

I also think the temperament of the baby has a lot to do with it too.  Whether the baby is a boy or a girl, if a baby is a high needs baby, is a fussy baby, or cries constantly, obviously a mother’s stress level is going to increase, which could put her at a higher risk for developing PPD.  These babies are harder to take care of.  Not every mother with a baby like this has PPD, but if they want to find causes, certainly this could be another factor contributing to PPD than simply saying the gender is the cause of PPD.  How many of those mothers in the French study had babies that had colic, or cried constantly, or screamed if they weren’t being held at all hours of the day?  How many of these depressed mothers were severely sleep deprived, which can be another contributing factor to PPD.

I also have a MAJOR problem with another part of the writings in this study which claim that women want “mini-me’s” (daughters) not sons.  I find that VERY offensive, and how shallow and condescending is that to the millions and millions of mothers who have sons?  Suddenly we are all secretly longing for daughters so we can have our “mini-me’s.”  Absolutely insulting!

It gets worse- the study goes on to theorize that when a woman doesn’t get the gender (boy or girl) that she was hoping for “she is more likely to suffer from decreased quality of life or severe depression.”  Again, how insulting to every mother who may have hoped that she was having one gender over the other?  That doesn’t mean that every woman every time, who doesn’t get the gender of baby she was hoping for, is more likely to suffer from a decreased quality of life. 

Usually, the mothers who I know, (myself included), who were hoping for a boy or a girl, and then had the opposite gender they were hoping for, couldn’t imagine their life without their baby, and would not give him or her up for their “desired” gender in a million years. Their quality of life improves with their baby, not decreases.  This study paints women and mothers as so shallow- as if having a boy or a girl-your desired gender- is the key to happiness, and not having your desired gender causes mothers to suffer from severe depression.  I just don’t believe that is the case with the majority of mothers.

I also have to respond to the study’s claim that women really do prefer girls over boys, because girls are requested more often in overseas adoptions from couples in the West- especially in America.  I don’t think this claim is true at all,  just because girls are being requested to be adopted in overseas adoptions over boys. 

I believe the reason more baby girls are requested in adoptions outside the US, is in these countries, THEY (parents in these countries) don’t want girls and put them up for adoption more often than sons.  In many countries where Americans are allowed to adopt, sons are the preferred gender, and parents will abandon girls more often than sons, bringing them to orphanages. 

It seems to me that this is common knowledge, and women in the US, who want to adopt a baby from these countries know that.  They know they will have a shorter wait, and a better chance of adopting a baby if they request a girl, because there are more girls waiting to be adopted than boys.  It is a simple supply and demand situation.

I wasn’t even going to blog about this study because I think this study is complete nonsense and just something else to make mothers of sons worry needlessly about.  I didn’t want to “publicize” this study any more than it already has been.

My sister suggested I write a post about it, so if mothers who do read this study are troubled by it, and seek additional information, there would be something else- another viewpoint- to consider.  That is the only reason I am blogging about this. 

I believe most mothers love and cherish their babies, no matter what their gender is.  Post-partum depression does happen, but for it to be contributed only because a mother is depressed because she didn’t have a boy or a girl, is just so far fetched.

It is irresponsible for this study to be published  and publicized as it is, because there is no other studies that can back it up.  It can cause more harm and grief to mothers who may be suffering from depression- now they have to wonder if their baby’s gender could be causing their depression. 

Until there is evidence and several more mothers studied in this case, these types of studies serve no valuable purpose to mothers.  When the statistics in the study have a real possiblity of only being a “quirk,” don’t publish these types of “findings” until there is scientific evidence to back it up- with real, fact based, statistics. 

Now I am getting off my soapbox, and going to go tuck my two, loveable, sweet, adoring, sons who have brought me so much joy and happiness- whom I’d give my life for- into bed.