How's that for a blog post title? And after so many months of abandoning you!
So, about that, sorry. It's been busy and I am trying to sort out how to fit all the stuff I need and want to do. Writing is definitely in the 'keep' box, but it's also something that requires me to have a chunk of quiet brain space and I just haven't been carving that out very well lately.
But I'm back and I'm going to talk a little bit about judgment. Not judgment of me (knock yourselves out if you want). No - these are the judgey pants I wear out in the world and I am afraid I have order in a size 6X, pink.
We were driving down a major road recently and Isabelle spotted a young boy who was sitting in the front driver side of a parked car.
"He's in the driving seat and not even in a car seat! He has BAD PARENTS, huh Mom?" Her first instinct is a spiteful 'j'accuse' of "BAD PARENTS". Spiteful. And confident that she is right and they are wrong. I recognize the anger and confidence - 'cause I have felt it many a time, about car seat safety, about feeding choices, about discipline, about, well, pretty much anything that another person might chose that I get to know about.
Six year olds are so much about rules and categories of right and wrong - Isabelle doesn't see a lot of gray in the world. I get that: it's a stage of development, not a character flaw. I like to think I'm more subtle than that (being well past 6 and all), but my first instinct was the same. Yes, yes, he does have bad parents - leaving him sitting in the driver seat while they were on the sidewalk.
In the next breath, I know there are a million reasons why a good parent might have allowed that. Heck, that I might allow it. So we talk about those reasons and why it's not safe most of the time, but it might be the right choice for a mommy or daddy to make. At six, she can already raise a skeptical eyebrow at me like a pro, but we decide that we can't really say that they are or not. And also, we will not be playing in the front seat in our family.
So, we kind of settle that one. Yet...
Peggy O'Mara has famously been quoted as saying that "Judgment is not always wrong" - I believe that. Human nature is imperfect and humans are vulnerable: we have a duty to protect each other. But there are so many times in my life that I feel that "j'accuse" and then the uncertain retreat and then.... do I settle on the right place before I open my mouth? For the "accused"? For my values? Does it even matter what I say when my visceral reaction is to condemn? Do my eyes speak louder than the carefully chosen words?
And which one tells the truth?
Showing posts with label lactivism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lactivism. Show all posts
Friday, April 9, 2010
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Forget goblins: it's the (Nestle) candy that should really scare you
A lot of attention has been focussed on the Nestle boybott following a firestorm around a PR junket. I'll let Annie at PhD in Parenting tell the story. I've been heartened by how questions I've gotten about the boycott and reasons behind it. With Hallowe'en coming up, many households are thinking about stocking up on candy - if you're paying more attention to who makes your chocolate these days, you'll no doubt begin to realize that Nestle has much of the market concerned in the typical Hallowe'en candy area.
October 26 to November 1 has been designated Global Nestle-Free Week. Even if you don't boycott Nestle the rest of the year, consider it for just this week around Hallowe'en. Information on how to maximize the impact of your participation can be found at INFACT.
To avoid Nestlé, you need to not only avoid Nestle labelled products, but also Crunch, Cailler, Galak/Milkybar, KitKat, Quality Street, Smarties, Baci, After Eight, Baby Ruth, Butterfinger, Lion, Aero, Polo and Frutips. It's a long list and it gets confusing. Infact Canada maintains an on-going list and information on the Nestle boycott here.
After you look at that list, you might wonder whether it wouldn't be easier to just list the things that you can give out. Here are a few ideas:
- ok, so toothbrushes and apples are likely to get your house toiletpapered. You might get away with stickers or colourful erasers. How about play dough? The big Play-Doh manufacturer makes tiny containers or you can get in touch with the nice folks over at Dirty Dough for a natural product. For something truly local, try making your own with the kids.
- check out local chocolate makers who make high quality yummies right in your community. My favourite in our neck of the woods is Sitting Around Eating Bonbons . She makes delicious, special chocolates in her tiny little shop - and the only guilt is about my diet with the organic, free trade yumminess.
- if you just need something you can pick up at the grocery store, try Mars products (which include M&Ms as well Mars, Twix and others). Jelly Belly beans are also a long-time favourite here. Now, these brands aren't fair trade compliant and they may contain stuff (like artificial colours) that aren't great for growing bodies and brains - but if it's between Twix and Kit Kat, take the Twix. Smarties vs. M&Ms, take the M&Ms.
Don't forget to have change for UNICEF available - and tell your friends why your Hallowe'en shopping has required a few extra steps this year.
October 26 to November 1 has been designated Global Nestle-Free Week. Even if you don't boycott Nestle the rest of the year, consider it for just this week around Hallowe'en. Information on how to maximize the impact of your participation can be found at INFACT.
To avoid Nestlé, you need to not only avoid Nestle labelled products, but also Crunch, Cailler, Galak/Milkybar, KitKat, Quality Street, Smarties, Baci, After Eight, Baby Ruth, Butterfinger, Lion, Aero, Polo and Frutips. It's a long list and it gets confusing. Infact Canada maintains an on-going list and information on the Nestle boycott here.
After you look at that list, you might wonder whether it wouldn't be easier to just list the things that you can give out. Here are a few ideas:
- ok, so toothbrushes and apples are likely to get your house toiletpapered. You might get away with stickers or colourful erasers. How about play dough? The big Play-Doh manufacturer makes tiny containers or you can get in touch with the nice folks over at Dirty Dough for a natural product. For something truly local, try making your own with the kids.
- check out local chocolate makers who make high quality yummies right in your community. My favourite in our neck of the woods is Sitting Around Eating Bonbons . She makes delicious, special chocolates in her tiny little shop - and the only guilt is about my diet with the organic, free trade yumminess.
- if you just need something you can pick up at the grocery store, try Mars products (which include M&Ms as well Mars, Twix and others). Jelly Belly beans are also a long-time favourite here. Now, these brands aren't fair trade compliant and they may contain stuff (like artificial colours) that aren't great for growing bodies and brains - but if it's between Twix and Kit Kat, take the Twix. Smarties vs. M&Ms, take the M&Ms.
Don't forget to have change for UNICEF available - and tell your friends why your Hallowe'en shopping has required a few extra steps this year.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
NIP, no tuck
Welcome to my contribution to this month's Carnival of Breastfeeding - the theme is nursing in public. Read on, then hop on the Carnival Ride of links at the bottom of this post!
Nursing in public, or NIP as it's known in internet speak, is one of those red herring subjects for me. Just the fact that it has its own internet acronym tells me there is something wrong - after all, there's no acronym for babies leaving the house, is there? In a normal world, if babies leave the house, then they breastfeed in public. Period.
But it's not a world where breastfeeding is as normal as it should be and that leads to all kinds of weird and contradictory dialogue among women and mothers. A very common comment I hear is: "Well, of course, you should be able to breastfeed your baby, but you should be discreet about it."
I would like to meet these legions of women who revel in the idea of shaking their milk-filled boobies and post-partum bellies in the faces of horrified strangers. Those would be interesting mamas to chat with. The reality is that breastfeeding mothers are just that - mothers who are trying to feed their hungry babies and comfort their sad/tired ones.
Discretion is in the eye of the beholder, really. What's discreet and comfortable for one nursing couple might be crazy exhibitionism for another. The trouble becomes that as soon as you allow a third party to decide what is and isn't acceptable, mothers lose the power to nurse their babies when they need it. They just do.
In 2007, I attended the LLLI Conference in Chicago. It was an amazing, fantastic week, so nourishing to be surrounded by women and their nurslings/slinglings - it's how the world should always be. But in the conference materials, there was a little warning box - reminding participants that we would be showcased and to exercise discretion in breastfeeding our babies outside the conference areas. It still bothers me that that was in there - though it didn't seem to change anyone's behaviour.
About that, I don't have a ton of pictures of me nursing in public (or nursing at all, really) - flashes and nursing babies don't get along so well. But here are a few of my favourites from that Chicago conference:
Nursing in public, or NIP as it's known in internet speak, is one of those red herring subjects for me. Just the fact that it has its own internet acronym tells me there is something wrong - after all, there's no acronym for babies leaving the house, is there? In a normal world, if babies leave the house, then they breastfeed in public. Period.
But it's not a world where breastfeeding is as normal as it should be and that leads to all kinds of weird and contradictory dialogue among women and mothers. A very common comment I hear is: "Well, of course, you should be able to breastfeed your baby, but you should be discreet about it."
I would like to meet these legions of women who revel in the idea of shaking their milk-filled boobies and post-partum bellies in the faces of horrified strangers. Those would be interesting mamas to chat with. The reality is that breastfeeding mothers are just that - mothers who are trying to feed their hungry babies and comfort their sad/tired ones.
Discretion is in the eye of the beholder, really. What's discreet and comfortable for one nursing couple might be crazy exhibitionism for another. The trouble becomes that as soon as you allow a third party to decide what is and isn't acceptable, mothers lose the power to nurse their babies when they need it. They just do.
In 2007, I attended the LLLI Conference in Chicago. It was an amazing, fantastic week, so nourishing to be surrounded by women and their nurslings/slinglings - it's how the world should always be. But in the conference materials, there was a little warning box - reminding participants that we would be showcased and to exercise discretion in breastfeeding our babies outside the conference areas. It still bothers me that that was in there - though it didn't seem to change anyone's behaviour.
About that, I don't have a ton of pictures of me nursing in public (or nursing at all, really) - flashes and nursing babies don't get along so well. But here are a few of my favourites from that Chicago conference:
Tom having his dinner between courses at the LLLI Closing Banquet. Look how little his head is and how bald he is!
Nursing at the top of the Navy Pier Ferris Wheel
Same spot, different angle so you can a bit of the city. One of my favourite pictures EVER.
Want to read more? Hop on the Carnival 'ride':
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
On guilt and the breastfeeding police
There's a lot of guilt involved in mothering - not least when it comes to how and what we feed our babies. A constant tension among breastfeeding advocates is ensuring that mothers are getting the information they need to make the right decision for their babies, while respecting their authority as parents and not devaluing their experience. It's heavy emotional stuff - and never straightforward.
For some out there, enough has been said about breastfeeding - anything further is meant to guilt and shame mothers into making the consensus choice. I have trouble with this on a number of fronts.
First, the notion that every new parent knows about breastfeeding and the risks of formula is absurd to anyone who spends any time discussing these issues with mothers. Front-line contacts from obstetricians to nurses to family doctors and pharmacists ought to be the foundations for good decisions, but too often they provide information that is out of date, coloured by their own professional bias or simply incorrect. Mothers need accurate information about the importance of breastfeeding and how to maximize chances of success: somewhat by definition, this means being clear about the consequences of not breastfeeding.
Second, while I believe strongly that a woman must determine the use of her own body, the 'personal choice' argument isn't quite so strong to me when it comes to breastfeeding. A mother who has chosen to birth and raise her child takes with that joy a burden of care - a child isn't owned, she is entrusted. Every baby deserves to be breastfed - as parents, we do countless things that are hard, uncomfortable and intrusive to care for our babies and children. Breastfeeding through challenges is no different than enduring the aches, pains and indignities that pregnancy brings - except that the pay-off is immediate.
Third, because breastfeeding is the biological norm, practices that encourage breastfeeding are good for babies and mothers whether they are ultimately successful at breastfeeding or not. Birth practices that empower women to remain in control of their bodies and their babies, engaging experienced empathetic attendants and post-partum care that recognizes the unique mother-baby dyad are the first steps to avoid many of the problems that lead to frustration and failure of breastfeeding relationships. But they are also the first steps to nuturing the mother so that she can in turn nuture her baby and feel confidence in her competence in that new role.
Advocates for breastfeeding whether health care professionals, volunteers or simply interested parents end up taking a lot of flack that's largely undeserved. We don't get any kind of bonus for helping a mother to breastfeed, spending hours encouraging her or researching a particularly thorny issue. Nor, to my knowledge, are there any posses hunting down formula-feeding mothers in public places to shame them or door-to-door solicitors trying to recruit pregnant women. There are many more mothers needing help and support than public health departments, clinics and La Leche League volunteers can help - they don't need to hunt them down.
Why don't we focus our collective energies on supporting mothers so that their pain and guilt can be avoided entirely?
For some out there, enough has been said about breastfeeding - anything further is meant to guilt and shame mothers into making the consensus choice. I have trouble with this on a number of fronts.
First, the notion that every new parent knows about breastfeeding and the risks of formula is absurd to anyone who spends any time discussing these issues with mothers. Front-line contacts from obstetricians to nurses to family doctors and pharmacists ought to be the foundations for good decisions, but too often they provide information that is out of date, coloured by their own professional bias or simply incorrect. Mothers need accurate information about the importance of breastfeeding and how to maximize chances of success: somewhat by definition, this means being clear about the consequences of not breastfeeding.
Second, while I believe strongly that a woman must determine the use of her own body, the 'personal choice' argument isn't quite so strong to me when it comes to breastfeeding. A mother who has chosen to birth and raise her child takes with that joy a burden of care - a child isn't owned, she is entrusted. Every baby deserves to be breastfed - as parents, we do countless things that are hard, uncomfortable and intrusive to care for our babies and children. Breastfeeding through challenges is no different than enduring the aches, pains and indignities that pregnancy brings - except that the pay-off is immediate.
Third, because breastfeeding is the biological norm, practices that encourage breastfeeding are good for babies and mothers whether they are ultimately successful at breastfeeding or not. Birth practices that empower women to remain in control of their bodies and their babies, engaging experienced empathetic attendants and post-partum care that recognizes the unique mother-baby dyad are the first steps to avoid many of the problems that lead to frustration and failure of breastfeeding relationships. But they are also the first steps to nuturing the mother so that she can in turn nuture her baby and feel confidence in her competence in that new role.
Advocates for breastfeeding whether health care professionals, volunteers or simply interested parents end up taking a lot of flack that's largely undeserved. We don't get any kind of bonus for helping a mother to breastfeed, spending hours encouraging her or researching a particularly thorny issue. Nor, to my knowledge, are there any posses hunting down formula-feeding mothers in public places to shame them or door-to-door solicitors trying to recruit pregnant women. There are many more mothers needing help and support than public health departments, clinics and La Leche League volunteers can help - they don't need to hunt them down.
Why don't we focus our collective energies on supporting mothers so that their pain and guilt can be avoided entirely?
Friday, April 24, 2009
Friday 5
A woman in Australia is awarded damages of almost A$50,000 after a 2003 sexual assault results in nipple damage that makes breastfeeding difficult.
Leave it to the AAP to claim defamation for being called more ethical than they actually are.
Nice to see things are changing in the back rooms of Washington - but no talk of seeing mothers nursing their babies where they belong - the front halls.
Hopefully, it's the beginning of a trend that sees cosmetic surgery on newborn boys stopped in our public hospitals.
I'm all for research that improves the well-being of babies, but do we really need research to tell us that cow's milk (no matter how scientifically packaged) is designed to meet the nutritional needs of.... calves?
Leave it to the AAP to claim defamation for being called more ethical than they actually are.
Nice to see things are changing in the back rooms of Washington - but no talk of seeing mothers nursing their babies where they belong - the front halls.
Hopefully, it's the beginning of a trend that sees cosmetic surgery on newborn boys stopped in our public hospitals.
I'm all for research that improves the well-being of babies, but do we really need research to tell us that cow's milk (no matter how scientifically packaged) is designed to meet the nutritional needs of.... calves?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
