Notes to the babysitter

Finally, went away with my husband for 2 nights. The kids were alone with sitters for the first time on overnights. Here are my (pretty hilarious) instructions to our fabulous caretakers about food:

Hi guys,

The kitchen is stocked, here are some guidelines:

ALICE IS ALLERGIC TO EGGS

even though I just wrote that in caps, please don’t make a big deal about this in front of her. I did, at first, making her terrified and shy about trying foods. Her allergy is very mild, don’t worry about checking ingredients, just ask her to pay attention to how her mouth feels. If the food has eggs in it, her tongue may get itchy and she will stop eating on her own. But, obviously, don’t give her eggs. I am writing about this because both Lucy and Rose love scrambled eggs for breakfast. You can also hard boil Lucy eggs for her lunch at Zoo camp.

Otherwise, as I think you know, the kids are allowed to eat what they want, when they want. They each have their own foodshelf in the cupboard. The order from top to bottom is Lucy, Alice, Rose. In the fridge, Lucy is in the middle, Alice the drawer above, Rose below drawer below. How it works is you make their meal– cereal, eggs, pasta, whatever. They cannot keep asking for food or ask you to keep making food. You are not a short order cook or servant. If they do not like what you made or do not feel like eating it, they can get whatever they want from their foodshelves, bring it to the table and eat it. I don’t care if they eat cereal for dinner or oreos for breakfast. Just make sure you put something healthy out.

If someone runs out of something on her foodshelf and the other kid is eating that thing in front of her, she has to share it or put it away.

NOT ALLOWED
to eat after dinner because they use eating to manipulate bedtime
to eat something in front of the other, if she doesnt have any, without sharing
to keep asking you to make food

Also, please do not use food as a reward. If you want, you can use the event of going out to get something and eating there as the reward, but not the food. If you promise them food, you should be prepared to give it to them even if they misbehave.

Here’s some stuff in the kitchen now that they like:

Cereal
Eggs (Rose and Lucy)
Fishsticks in freezer (Alice loves with ketchup)
Pasta
Tortellini
Bagels
Broccoli
Asparagus
Frozen peas
Chicken with stars soup (Alice loves)
Black beans (Alice loves)
Whipped Yoplait yogurt (Alice loves)
Wonder bread, ham, cheese, salami, jelly/ butter sabwich, rice cakes with peanut butter, granola bars– all can be for Lucy’s lunch

You will probably need to buy milk. I’m leaving an envelope of $ for each of you. Let me know if you had to spend more.

PLEASE PUT SUNSCREEN ON LUCY BEFORE CAMP, make sure she has water bottle for camp

THANK YOU GOOD LUCK!

More info on how I feed my kids in order to prevent eating disorders (or, possibly to document exactly how I screwed them up)  here.

More reviews for Sugar In My Bowl

From  Loquaciously Yours:

For those of us who’ve been left/betrayed or afraid we’re about to be, and that’s probably most of us, a head’s up about Margot McGowan’s intense and beautifully narrated piece Light Me Up—have a box of Kleenex handy and a friend’s phone number close by.

Read the rest here.

Peggy Orenstein counts girls

Peggy Orenstein blogged about the typical response she gets when she points out kids’ movies are mostly all about boys. People argue there’s gender equality, pointing out token ‘strong girls:’ what about Jesse in Toy Story? Dory in Finding Nemo? That girl chef in Ratatouille?

Here’s the problem: The girl is not the star of the movie! The movie is not her story, her experience. Hermione is a great character, smart and strong, but the series belongs to Harry. It’s all about Harry’s quest. It’s Harry’s adventure.

The reason this is so important is because its literal programming, training girls that no matter how brilliant they may be, they will be limited to supporting roles.

Orenstein does a great count of boy versus girl characters in Pixar films. Read her blog here.

Erica Jong on Anthony Weiner

From TIME:

Best-selling author Erica Jong knows a thing or two about sexual politics. Her taboo-breaking 1973 novel, Fear of Flying, has sold 20 million copies in over 40 languages. Jong still has the magic touch when it comes to literature about women and eros: her new anthology of essays and short stories, Sugar in My Bowl: Real Women Write About Real Sex (Ecco) — featuring contributions from Anne Roiphe, Gail Collins, Jennifer Weiner and many others — is getting terrific early reviews. Jong spoke with TIME senior reporter Andrea Sachs from her Manhattan home about Anthony Weiner, Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK), Arnold Schwarzenegger and other powerful misbehaving men in the news.

Read the full TIME interview here. Read more about Sugar In My Bowl here.

Don’t mess with Reel Grrls

I got this email from a friend. Check it out and give these girls some $$$

Dear Joe,

Help the Grrls Who Said NO to Comcast

This time Comcast has gone too far.

When Seattle’s Reel Grrls – an award-winning program that teaches teenage girls to make their own media – criticized Comcast on Twitter for its outrageous hiring of FCC Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker, Comcast came after them.

A Comcast VP immediately fired off an email saying the company was cutting off $18,000 in funding it had pledged for a summer camp teaching filmmaking, editing and screenwriting. Without those funds, the Reel Grrls camp won’t happen.

We need to stand up to Comcast’s censors – and show these young media justice activists we’ve got their backs.

Can you give $25 to Reel Grrls to keep their summer camp going without Comcast’s cash?

Reel Grrls didn’t back down or delete their tweet. They didn’t let Comcast silence them. Instead, they called their allies and alerted the media.

And once the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Associated Press got hold of the story, Comcast suddenly changed its tune. It claimed the threats were “unauthorized” and said it wouldn’t yank the funds.

But Reel Grrls are sticking to their principles. They’re telling Comcast to keep its money if it’s going to try to censor what they say.

It’s not easy for any nonprofit to turn down $18,000. That’s why Free Press and the Center for Media Justice are asking our supporters to chip in and make sure the Reel Grrls summer camp stays open.

Show your support – help our allies stand up to Comcast’s censors

Reel Grrls are training the next generation of media makers and activists. Their brave and inspiring response under pressure should be a lesson to all of us in how to defend free speech and stand up to bullies like Comcast.

Now it’s our turn to show them that their allies in the movement for better media won’t let them down. Please visit the Reel Grrls site and give as much as you can.

In solidarity,

Craig Aaron
Free Press

Malkia Cyril
Center for Media Justice

P.S. Check out this fabulous video the Reel Grrls made telling their side of the story bit.ly/kM4Wnw.

1. Washington Post, “Tweet about FCC member’s new job at Comcast sets off firestorm,” May 19, 2011: washingtonpost.com/business/economy/tweet-about-fcc-members-new-job-at-comcast-sets-off-firestorm/2011/05/19/AFZNiP7G_story.html

2. The Street, “Comcast’s Revenge for Tweet: Today’s Outrage,” May 20, 2011: thestreet.com/story/11126955/1/comcasts-revenge-for-tweet-todays-outrage.html

Reviews of ‘Sugar In My Bowl’

From Kirkus:

The approaches to the still-taboo topic of feminine sexuality—at least, for women writers seeking approbation from the literary establishment—are, as Jong notes, “as varied as sexuality itself” and as exuberantly diverse as the contributors themselves. They range from such emerging talents as Elisa Albert and J.A.K. Andres to such luminaries as Rebecca Walker, Eve Ensler, Susan Cheever, Anne Roiphe and Fay Weldon, and represent a multiethnic, multigenerational swath of some of the finest women writers in the United States. Most of the pieces deal with the perennial themes of sexual coming-of-age, social and religious sexual hang-ups and lusty obsessions for male bodies (as well as female ones). Some deal with lesser-discussed—but no less important—subjects like procreative sex and eroticism in old age. Still others fearlessly explore fetishism, childhood masturbation, kink, sexual addiction and the excitement that, in the words of Linda Gray Sexton, comes from “the offering up of one’s body like a sacrifice upon the temple of the bed.” While sex is the source of life and some of the most powerful joys—and agonies—imaginable, it is also invariably linked to death. And that, writes Jong, “is part of our discomfort with it.” But the contributors to this collection never make sex facile. As they work against cultural expectations and literary double standards, they make women’s depictions of “doing it” just another aspect of a more fully realized human consciousness.

A smart, scrumptiously sexy romp of a read.

From Salon:

As soon as I cracked opened Erica Jong’s new anthology, “Sugar in My Bowl: Real Women Write About Real Sex,” I was overcome with giddiness. The table of contents boasted female writers from august publications sharing the most intimate aspects of their lives. It isn’t common for serious female writers — the sort who write about respectable issues like politics and poverty — to dip their toes into that piranha-infested lake of personal judgment and criticism. Just as good girls don’t talk about sex, good-girl writers don’t write about sex. Not only can it be devastating personally, but it can also earn you a professional reputation as a chick lit author or, worse, a sex writer.

But here was Ariel Levy — author of the treatise against porn culture, “Female Chauvinist Pigs” — taking a break from her highbrow analyses of gender and sexual politics for the New Yorker to write about the first time she had sex. That’s not to mention: Gail Collins of the New York Times remembering the anti-sex education she received at her Catholic girls high school; Slate’s Meghan O’Rourke seeking solace in sex after her mother’s death; and novelist Anne Roiphe recalling playing doctor with a male friend at age 5, and then again as teenagers.

Read the rest from Salon here.

Read ReelGirl’s post on Sugar In My Bowl here.

The book comes out June 14. You can pre-order it here.

Schwarzenegger on single moms

Here’s Schwarzenegger’s take on single moms in 2001:

“The parents are the single most important influence on a child, followed by education and the peer group…The number of single parents in the U.S. has quadrupled since the ’60s, and there has also been an increase in violence and school shootings. All that stuff has increased largely because of a lack of parenting, and many households only have one biological parent — so many of them are fatherless. It really creates a big problem.”

An excellent speech on the importance of good parenting. Just one thing. Schwarzenegger should’ve made clear that this ‘big problem’ only applies when the dad is not a movie star. For those tragic cases, Schwarzenegger could say:

“Unfortunately, I can’t be the one to impregnate all the women in California. Therefore, we’ve got to put some policies in place to better support those women who are not involved with me or with men like me. Many women in California, I’m sorry to say, will need to find a way to financially support themselves.

So, first, we must significantly increase the minimum wage which is predominantly earned by the female dominated service industry.

We’ve also got to make it a high priority that all women in California and their children get access to affordable health care.

We must expand family planning and funding services, making sure they are available to all women. We should lead the country in mandating that all health insurance providers cover contraception.

Because teen pregnancy is the number one indicator that the mother and her child will spend a life in poverty, we must make it the highest priority to reduce teen pregnancies. All schools must teach sex education including STD prevention.

And speaking of those public schools, we’ve got to fix the broken public school system of California, ranked as one of the worst in the country. Only when women are well educated can they acquire good jobs that enable them to become breadwinners for themselves and their families.

I’ve decided to follow the great example of my Democrat wife, Maria Shriver, a well-known advocate for women. Without her support, I could never get elected (especially with pesky tattle-tales accusing me of groping them.) Improving the status of women in this state will also be my priority, because, though there are many womanizer bosses in California, I’ve come to realize, there are simply not enough of us to go around.”

In recent times, we’ve seen the tide turn. After discovering secret affairs, instead of standing by their men, several high profile women decided not to stick around. The list includes Jenny Sanford, Elin Nordegren, Eva Longoria, Sandra Bullock, and, now, Maria Shriver. I guess that’s progress for the women who can afford to leave.

What if van Gogh took Prozac?

So begins Peter Kramer’s excellent book Against Depression. Kramer is also the author of a better known work, Listening to Prozac.

I was intrigued by the book because anti-depressants have always sort of disturbed me; I wondered if they were ‘happy pills,’ too widely prescribed, especially to women. Are Zoloft and Paxil supposed to drug people into conformity and complacency? I also wrote an op-ed for the SF Chronicle in 2001 about the dubious marketing of the drug Sarafem and the billions of dollars huge pharmaceutical companies stood to make just by essentially giving Prozac a new name.

In Against Depression, Kramer writes that during his book tour for Listening to Prozac, wherever he went or spoke, invariably, someone in the audience would smile and ask the witty question: What if Kierkegaard had taken Prozac? Hemingway? Descartes? Kant? Hegel?

Kramer argues we have romanticized depression to the extent that we now believe that great art and important thought come from the neurotic mind. Kramer believes the contrary, that depressed artists managed to create not because of their depression but in spite of it.

He also believes the foundations of Western civilization are based on depressive thinking, that the Greeks, from whom the origins of Western philosophy, art, and government all come, were depressives.

Kramer writes:

“Once the vogue of melancholy is enshrined in literature, once the depressive perspective is identified with the poetic, once the pattern of narratives of self-development is set– art accepts and plays with these forms. As depression, like dysentery and epilepsy and the rest, declares itself a disease, our valuation of depressive art might seem an anachronism, the remnant of a tradition required to mitigate and justify otherwise inexplicable sorrow.”

Kramer states that some qualities of the disease of depression– alienation, hyper-sensitivity– have been romanticized, while other common and frequent symptoms (disorganization, poor memory, irritability, difficulty changing intention into action, paranoia, anxiety, lack of resilience, vulnerability to harm, paralysis, hostility, and impatience) have been downplayed or ignored. Kramer argues depression is a disease of brain abnormalities, partly attributable to decreased blood flow to different parts of the brain.

Kramer believes that alienation– the ability to step back and look at the culture or political bodies while separate from them– can be a useful skill. But getting stuck in alienation is a sickness. Depression is a ‘stuck switch,’ an impairment in the stress/ response system. Basically he’s saying artists don’t need a little bit of depression to create art any more than women need a little bit of anorexia to be fit.

I was particularly fascinated by Kramer’s analysis of the Greeks because I was a philosophy major in college back in the nineties when post-structuralism was popular. We learned how the Greeks had sent us all off on the wrong track by dividing the world into binary oppositions such as good/ evil; right/ wrong; mind/ body etc. Science has shown the mind and body are not as separate as once believed. We now understand this kind of either/ or philosophy leads to all kinds of distorted thinking, including racism and sexism by creating perpetual constructs of the self as separate from ‘the other.’

Kramer’s polemic is similar to the post-structuralists in that he also argues the Greeks were somewhat off base. He writes that many Greeks were depressives including Heracles, Ajax, and Bellerophon. It’s interesting to think about. What if the foundations of our Western thought were created by depressives? What if it’s this kind of training (and the depressed part of your brain) telling us we need depression to make art? And finally, could these thousand year old standards of equating great art with depression be contributing to our culture’s failure to nurture and recognize women artists?

Just like male artists, many women artists are depressives, Virgina Woolf, Sylvia Plath, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, the list goes on and on. Studies also show that women fall victim to depression more than men. But there are also far more male artists, novelists, and writers than female ones. Perhaps, depressed men can get away with having lives, having families, and making art. Whereas depressed women are mostly just depressed. Women are well -trained to put up with the self indulgent behavior that accompanies depression, giving husbands their required space while tending to the kids. But few moms can afford to fall victim to the tortured artist prototype. Not if you have kids and want to get anything accomplished. Being healthy is your best bet.

Kramer writes that the main symptoms of health are striving to create and possessing the energy required to do so. Not getting overwhelmed or stuck. That model seems far more conducive to fostering women artists than depression.

Geena Davis optimistic about gender roles changing

Geena Davis tells the Wall Street Journal that when she presented her data to filmmakers about the lack of girls roles in kids films, they listened, were surprised, and promised change.

Davis tells WSJ:

 The whole idea for me was I wanted to take the facts and go back to the people who are creating the media. We go straight to the studios and the producers, the Writers Guild, the Animators Guild, the Casting Directors Guild, and present our research.

The fascinating thing that we found from the beginning was that they were absolutely shocked.

The fact that, in general, all of their movies are so lacking in a female presence is stunning to them. That makes it, obviously, not a conspiracy, not a conscious choice, and leaves them very open to rethinking it and saying, “Now that we know, we’re going to make some changes.”

New study finds ‘huge gender imbalance’ in kidlit

The Guardian reports on a new, extensive study on gender in children’s books by Florida State University Professor Janice McCabe that found male characters far outnumber girl characters. This lack results in “a symbolic annihilation of women and girls” in the real world.

The gender disparity sends the message that “women and girls occupy a less important role in society than men or boys.” Here’s just one stat: “Male animals are central characters in 23% of books per year, the study found, while female animals star in only 7.5%.”

The Guardian reports:

The authors of the study said that even gender-neutral animal characters are frequently labeled as male by mothers reading to their children, which only “exaggerates the pattern of female under-representation”. “These characters could be particularly powerful, and potentially overlooked, conduits for gendered messages,” they said. “The persistent pattern of disparity among animal characters may reveal a subtle kind of symbolic annihilation of women disguised through animal imagery…”

“I guess the challenge is to write books for boys that have female characters in, that the boys will relate to. It’s a sad fact that books written for boys do tend to fall rapidly into the old stereotypes, and the action figures, baddies etc are generally male, and very straightforward males as well. I try to get away from that. It’s a been a while since I wrote an action-type book, but I am working on one now and it does involve four young people – two girls, two boys – and I always try to make my girls really stand out.”

But it’s not only an absence of female central characters which is a problem in children’s books, believes former children’s laureate Anne Fine: it’s how the women are represented when they do appear. “Publishers rightly take care to put in positive images of a mix of races, but seem not to even notice when they use stereotypical and way out-of-date images of women,” she said”…

The notion, meanwhile, that boys only read books by and about males does “become a self-fulfilling prophecy”, Fine said. “More worryingly, in these new lists of recommended books for boys, there’s a heap of fantasy and violence, very little humour (except for the poo and bum sort), and almost no family novels at all. If you offer boys such a narrow view of the world, and don’t offer them novels that show them dealing with normal family feelings, they will begin to think this sort of stuff is not for them.”

Fine believes that “women should be giving a much beadier eye to the books they share with children … It’s important to balance much loved old-fashioned classics with stuff that evens things up a bit and reflects women’s current role in the world,” she said.

What about dads reading to kids? But otherwise, great points. These stats are sad, but still, I’m happy to see that the gender disparity in the imaginary world is getting more and more attention, because its so obvious, yet so accepted, it’s paradoxically invisible. Back in 2007, I wrote about the sexism in the blockbuster movie Ratatouille for the San Jose Mercury News after I went to see it with my four year old daughter. You can read the full piece here, but here’s an excerpt:

After I saw “The Lion King,” I wanted to know: Why couldn’t the lionesses have attacked weak, old Scar? Why did they have to wait around for Simba to come back to Pride Rock to help them? I was told: that’s how it is in nature – lionesses need a male to lead the pride. So a lion can be best friends with a warthog and a meerkat without gobbling them up, but a lioness heading a pride? That could never happen in the animal kingdom!…

The hyper-concern for gender accuracy in the fantasy world extends to things like plush toys – when I refer to my kid’s animals as “she,” adults invariably do a double take, checking for manes or tusks: even female toys must stay in their place.

If you watch classic Tom and Jerry now on a DVD , there’s a note on the screen before the cartoon begins recognizing the racial stereotypes and explaining about the era it was created. There’s no mention about gender whatsoever. There are hardly any females in Tom and Jerry at all. Unless there’s a love interest, then she’s got bright red lips and bats her eyelashes constantly as Tom and Jerry compete over her. I guess she’s just part of our 2011 era.