Bedtime Stories

Bear likes us to tell him stories at bedtime. (He's six. Three-year-old Eagle usually wants a song, but Bear always wants stories.) He does enjoy listening to stories on CD (the Magic Tree House ones are favorites), and he does like books, but most of all he likes told stories, and he especially likes new ones.

I have long-since exhausted the easy-to-remember ones, the common fairy tales, and the simple poems. I have never been good at making up stories (Hubby has told the boys a whole series of "Sir Reginald" stories which he makes up with apparent ease, but I do not have that gift.) Then I began telling the less familiar stories, some of the more obscure fairy tales, and trying to remember books I read as a child but have not seen in years. One such nearly-forgotten book is Bartholomew Cubbins. Actually, it's two books:  "The 500 hats of Bartholomew Cubbins" and "Bartholomew and the Oobleck." They are Dr Seuss books, and I enjoyed them as a kid, and thought that Bear might too.

So I tried to tell him the stories.

Only it's been at least 18 years since I cracked either book, and I fear I have forgotten more than a little. As I told the stories, I regularly got to places where I said "um, I kinda forget what comes next..." so then I made up bits which may or may not resemble the original story.

The next night, Bear said "Mom, I want the stories of Bartholomy Covins again!"

Of course he did.

And the night after that, and the night after that...

The day after that I emailed my dad. Grandpas are good at reading stories, and he was agreeable to helping a tired mommy and the story-hungry grandson.

I remember one Christmas, when I was perhaps 11, my grandparents bought us a book of fairy tales. It had elaborate illustrations and was a beautiful book. With the book was a cassette tape of Grandma and Grandpa reading the stories from the book. We listened to that tape over and over and over...there are phrases which I still hear in Grandma's voice or Grandpa's voice, and I can't think of any of the stories without thinking of them.

Of course we don't use cassette players so much now, but digital options have simplified both the recording and sharing processes. Today I got an email with .wav files of two stories, recorded in my father's voice. We may live 2500 miles away from Grandma and Grandpa, but they can still read bedtime stories to my boys. (And I no longer have to wrack my brain trying to remember the details of books I haven't seen in two decades!)

May I suggest, for anyone who has beloved little ones who live far away (or even not so far away), that you record some stories for them. Send the books along if you like too, but definitely read them stories. Parents who are tired of the same three books all the time could make recordings too, but I really think that stories from grandparents are invaluable. And the digital copies won't wear out the way that old cassette tape did. Make some mp3s, burn a CD, share stories across generations. ☺

Thanksgiving week 3--Feminism Strikes Again

I'm a few days late on this... but we'll all politely ignore that, ok? It's still the first half of the week. That's close enough!

This week I have been reading a book about the women's movement in the United States from 1960-2008. I was fairly uneducated on all of this, having heard snippets of "bra burning" and "ERA marches" but not really knowing the details of any of it. When Everything Changed by Gail Collins is 400 pages long and I have devoured it in a week. It is fascinating.
As I gain a better understanding of the status quo in 1960, I sympathize with why those feminists were so radical. They had to be. Women fought for 100 years to get the right to vote, but even after that they were limited in many ways. For example, a woman (even a single woman) could not get a credit card or loan unless she had her spouse (or father) to co-sign with her. One principal proudly explained that he loved hiring women teachers because they were just as good as the men "but I can pay them half as much!" As late as 1972, a woman senator was literally forced to share a chair (with a black male senator) in committee, because the committee chairman considered them each to be "only half a person."


Wow we have come a long way. And yet in some areas we continue to fight exactly the same problems. Although I love being a stay at home mom, I recognize that not everyone wants to do that, or is able to do that. While the economy struggles, more and more women feel that they need to work, even if they want to be home with their children. Most women in this country (and certainly teachers) now get paid more than half of men's wages...but the national average is 78%, so the gender gap is still there. Women are half the population, but only 17% of the US congress. Is this because fewer women run for office? Or because the citizenry believe that men are more capable? Regardless, it does mean that most of women's concerns are underrepresented in federal legislation. In households where both parents work, usually the woman is still expected to handle the majority of the housekeeping and cooking. In broken families, women usually keep the children, but about a third of fathers do not contribute financial or other child support. Only 3 of every 100 rapists ever spends even one day behind bars. In other words, we still have a long way to go.

And so in that spirit, I would like to share a list of things that this feminist is grateful for this week

1. That my husband (both financially and otherwise) supports my desire to be a stay at home parent.
2. That my parents (especially my mother) taught me frugality and sustainability as a way of life, so that I have the skills to live modestly and within our means.
3. That I have sufficient education (and in an appropriate field) that I could support my family if I needed too.
4. That I and my family have been able to take advantage of programs such as WIC and medicaid to help us make ends meet when we were struggling.
5. That, in spite of how notoriously low teacher's pay is, that it also comes with good medical benefits.
6. For the many women--and men--who went before me, fighting battles for women (such as getting the right to vote, or to get loans, or own property, or escape abusive marriages) so that there is a little less left to fight for now.
7. For the many women--and men--who are still fighting the good fight, in their many ways. Whether they are teaching their daughters that they are equally important with their sons, or giving them the skills and education to go somewhere in the world. Whether they are making laws or catching babies or counseling victims. And for the many who will continue to do these things in the future.

Harry Potter goodness

I didn't know anything about Harry Potter (had not even heard of the character or the books actually) when a group of my college friends got together for opening night of the first movie, and invited me to come along. That first movie was magical, and I enjoyed it.
Some of my younger siblings' friends were reading the books, and my siblings wanted to as well, so my mother previewed them and said they were great books. Half of my family started reading them.
In the summer of 2003 (having seen movies 1 and 2), I read the first four books. In one week. And then five came out and my whole family spent a week swiping the book from each other--there were multiple bookmarks in it and we all were keeping track of who was how far into the book and which scenes we could discuss with whom.
I bought books six and seven on the days they were released. Six I had to wait around a bit for my husband to finish reading it before I could have it (I spent my time re-reading half of five). Seven came out on my birthday though, so I told him I got first dibs on it. I read faster anyway. I finished it in under a week.

My son, Wolf, has wanted to see the movies as all his friends have watched them. But our family's rule is that you have to read the books before you're allowed to see the movies. We figure that reading the book demonstrates sufficient maturity to deal with the content of the film...some kids are ready at 9, some not until 15. We have that same rule for Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and others.
Wolf started the first book when he was 9, but got bogged down. He listened to the audiobooks of one and two, but we told him that didn't count as reading, and that he'd have to actually read the books. At 10 1/2, he finally did. He read all seven books in about 4 months (which is quite impressive as he's not a very fast reader, and it is 3363 pages). Book by book, as he finished them, he got to see the movies, all except the last one, which Hubby and I had not seen either.

For Christmas, we found the box set of all 8 movies on sale, so we got it. On Christmas night we started a marathon...a movie a night (sometimes more). On New Year's Eve, we watched the final movie.

I enjoyed the books when I read them. I have generally liked the movies but after the first two was always frustrated by something in the adaptation. Watching them back to back though, I found the magic was rekindled. Now I want to read all the books again.

I leave you with a couple of youtube movies that I really enjoyed this week amidst our Pottermania.

"Marching On" by OneRepublic
Montage of the ongoing friendships, fairly warm and fuzzy in spite of the ups and downs


"This is War" by 30 Seconds to Mars
Montage of the ongoing battle...a little more intense

Read to your Kids

Reason #339 that you should read to your kids every day?

In the middle of the night, when Eagle woke up and was sad because I would not nurse him (we're nightweaning), he went and brought me a book (and then another and another).
And I "read" them to him in the dark, from memory, because I knew the books without having to turn on a light.
And the boy was happy (even though he couldn't see the pictures any more than I could see the words) simply because mommy was reading to him.
And he went to sleep.

The Dance of the Dissident Daughter by Sue Monk Kidd

There is a great review of this book at With Your Mutual Approbation, so I won't repeat what she said, (you should just go read that review too!) but I will add some thoughts of my own as well as a few quotes.

The book has four sections, chronicling Kidd's journey "from christian tradition to the sacred feminine." The sections are Awakening, Initiation, Grounding, and Empowerment. The book is a little like a diary, or a documentary of her personal journey of discovery. She has excerpts from her journal, she talks about art she created, dreams she had, rituals she did, and her conversations and research during the time (it covers several years). She draws from MANY sources, some of which clicked for me more than others. Art, history, theologians, psychology, mythology, and feminism combine in her own personal melting pot of putting in all the pieces and creating a new self and a new view of the world.

I think the greatest point of this book is that it approaches the idea of the Divine Feminine from a Christian perspective. In other words, it does not discount Christianity, it merely broadens the view. 

I feel like I have been or am doing some similar things (pulling from many sources to make a new paradigm), however my own feelings and conclusions aren't all the same as hers. I think she makes some good points though. In the first half or so of "Awakening" I thought wow, this could be me writing this; but then in the later part of that section, plus most of "Initiation," I felt like I really didn't relate. In those parts she was pushing back against the repression she felt in the patriarchal society, particularly the patriarchal church. The LDS church is pretty patriarchal in practice, but it is NOT so much in doctrine (ie, we already have a belief in  Heavenly Mother), so I don't feel nearly so repressed or disenfranchised as Kidd did. As the book got into the "Grounding" part I started relating again though, and really liked many of her conclusions.

Kidd's experiences combined feminism with spirituality, and while there is a lot of room for overlap, I feel that there is also lots of room for separation. So I took the intellectual stimulation and lapped it up as food for thought...but without feeling any obligation to agree with any particular part. I was intrigued by her interpretations and insights in some areas, and more or less apathetic about others. In the long run though, I found it difficult to put the book down, and would heartily recommend it to anyone (especially any woman, but really any one) who is open to thinking about things from a broader perspective.


Here are a few quotes or ideas from the book that I particularly liked:

"I often went to Catholic mass or Eucharist at the Episcopal church, nourished by the symbol and power of this profound feeding ritual. It never occurred to me how odd it was that women, who have presided over the domain of food and feeding for thousands of years, were historically and routinely barred from presiding over it in a spiritual context. And when the priest held out the host and said, "This is my body, given for you," not once did I recognize that it is women in the act of breastfeeding who most truly embody those words and who are also the most excluded from ritually saying them" (15).
An LDS acquaintance recently made the point that women literally shed their blood for others in menstruation, the marriage bed, and childbirth. (Those, along with lactation and menopause, are the five pagan "women's blood mysteries" and are considered sacred, which I think is appropriate. How wonderful would it be to raise daughters to think of their bleeding as sacred rather than as a curse?!)
In a later part of the book, Kidd mentions that the phrase "El Shaddai" (used in the Old Testament as a name for God) has usually been translated as "the almighty," but in fact 'shad' is also a Hebrew word for breast, and the 'ai' ending is feminine. So another reasonable interpretation is "the breasted one," or nurturing mother. And how many times in scripture does God speak of gathering us "as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wing"? Indeed, I must agree with Ms Kidd that the Old Testament is actually FULL of positive female references.

"The question then occurred to me: Well, [if] the Divine is ultimately formless and genderless, what's the big deal? Why all this bother?
"The bother is because we have no other way of speaking about the Absolute. We need forms and images. Without them we have no way of relating to the Divine. Symbol and image create a universal spiritual language. It's the language the soul understands. 
"And yet--and here's the crux--the images that have pervaded our speech, thought, and feeling about the Divine have told us the Divine is exclusively male. They have told us there is only one form and that form is masculine. Indeed, the image, language, and metaphor of God as male has been used so exclusively, for so long, that most people seem to believe that God is male. 
"How many times had I heard someone say "God is not male, He is spirit"?" (137-140).
The author is writing from a mainstream Christian perspective, and of course LDS theology does not quite align with this--we believe that God the Father IS male--but we also believe in the existence of God's wife, a Mother and Goddess, His partner and equal. And so, while I would word the issue differently, I still have to ask--if this is a true thing, why won't we talk about it?

I particularly liked a part where the author wrote about Matroyshka dolls (russian nesting dolls). She had a dream where a wisewoman archetype (who appeared in a lot of her dreams) gave her a doll, and showed her essentially the wisewoman (goddess) within herself. Later she learned that 'matroyshka' means 'mother' and she was struck by the idea of a mother within a mother within a mother. I was thinking about that, and how a woman's eggs are inside her when she is born. In other words, when a woman is pregnant with a daughter, it is not only her daughter but also her granddaughters who are within her. Just like the mother doll. And if you go back through enough mothers, we come all the way to Eve, and to Heavenly Mother. She talked about sitting in the "Great Lap" of Heavenly Mother, just as a child would sit in the lap of an earthly mother or grandmother.

Kidd concludes with some thoughts about why we benefit from having female authority as well as male, and it is because the two sexes simply do things differently. Men are naturally inclined to create hierarchical pyramids, whereas women are more likely to create weblike networks. Men compete, women build teams. It is not that one way is superior or inferior, it is that they both have their place, and neither should be pushed out by the other. As women, living in a predominately male-organized culture, we benefit from finding or creating female authority patterns in our lives, because we understand and relate to them better. Just as I felt a greater understanding of the atonement when I thought of being a mother sending my son to die (rather than the oft-repeated "God sent his Son"), so too we can grow closer to God the Father (as well as God the Mother) by acknowledging the presence--and differences--of each.

"I think women understand that 

we create change 

as we live out the experiences of our souls 

in the common acts of life" 

(222).

"Punished by Rewards" by Alfie Kohn

...the trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise, and other bribes.

"Like most things that we and the people around us do constantly, the use of rewards has come to seem so natural and inevitable that merely to post the question why are we doing this? can strike us as perplexing--and also, perhaps, a little unsettling" (13-14).

Punishing kids is bad, spanking and time-outs and yelling damage their self-esteem and make them resentful, right? So how do we get them to do what we want them to do? Rewards! It's the magic answer for a parent who wants to be positive! Sticker charts, bonuses to the allowance, penny jars, praise... focus on the positive and they will do those things more, right? After all, the rats in the studies did!

But humans are not rats.

"...our everyday practices rest on an implicit theory of human nature that fails to do us justice. When we repeatedly promise rewards...we are assuming that [the person] could not or would not choose to act this way on their own. If the capacity for responsible action, the natural love of learning, and the desire to do good work are already part of who we are, then the tacit assumption to the contrary can fairly be described as dehumanizing" (26).

This is the second Alfie Kohn book I have read. The other, Unconditional Parenting, I loved and hated at the same time. It challenged much of what I thought about parenting--much of what I thought about human nature--and yet it felt very right. (His books are quite dense and take some time to get through, which I think makes them a little tiring...but it was worth the three library renewals to get through this one!)

I took notes as I read this book,  so rather than try to re-write everything from the book, I'm mostly going to just give you a copy of my notes. ☺

A Few Facts about Rewards (based on scientific studies--which he quotes extensively) 

• Rewards are effective for getting a dependent being to do something (anyone who is not truly, fully dependent on you will stop responding to the reward)
• Rewards are effective only for as long as the reward lasts
• Rewards are effective at inducing compliance in the present (but not at instilling morals or ethics)
• Rewards damage relationships. Peers compete, lack teamwork, and blame each other for failures. In the relationship between rewarder and rewardee the unequal status is solidified.
• "Rewards are not actually solutions at all; they are gimmicks, shortcuts, quick fixes that mask problems and ignore reasons. They never look below the surface [to ascertain the cause or source of the behavior, nor solve it]" (60).
• "When we are working for a reward, we do exactly what is necessary to get it and no more" (63).
• Rewards diminish motivation, therefore "extrinsic motivators are most dangerous when offered for something we want children to WANT to do" (87).

The most notable aspect of a positive judgment is not that it is positive, but that it is a judgment" (102).I talked about this idea (of judging) in this post. I gave some examples of using neutral responses rather than verbal praise, for example "that's an interesting picture, tell me about it!" instead of "what a beautiful picture!" (Really, no matter how cute he is, my toddler isn't Michelangelo and we all know it.)


"Rewards and punishments are not opposites at all; they are two sides of the same coin. And it is a coin that does not buy very much" (50).

So, what is a better option than rewarding (or punishing)? Kohn shares a gameplan:
1--Begin by evaluating why the child is misbehaving. Did they know/understand what was expected? Were they physically and mentally able to comply? Did they try?
2--Assume that the child had the best motives (that are consistent with the facts). Usually they did.
3--Use the least intrusive method of correction or instruction that is possible.

Use the 3 C's
Content--are you asking for reasonable behaviors? consider the capacity of the child and the relative importance of the issue.
Collaboration--work together with the child(ren) to make household rules, create family expectations, etc.
Choice--(a continuation of 'collaboration), involve the kids. Bobby may have chosen to hit his brother, but he did not choose to be spanked--the parent chose  to attach that specific consequence; so even if Bobby knew about it, he did not choose it. Instead, involve kids in decision about how to resolve things. Teach them autonomy.

• Be a person. A real person. A nice person. Use 'I' rather than the third person to refer to yourself. (like this!)
• Model the good behavior. Remember that our actions speak so loudly they cannot hear what we say!
• Explain why. Every person, no matter their age, has a right to know why they are being asked to do a thing.
• Assume the best motives.
• Emphasize perspective taking. Try to understand their side, try to help them learn to understand yours.
• Do not rig choices when you offer them. (this post details this idea a bit)

In the end, kids need to feel love and positivity withOUT strings attached. They need our love without it being dependent on behavior. In short, they need unconditional love, and we need to be unconditional parents.

Arctic Homestead

When I was growing up, my mother always started off our homeschool day by reading to us. She read us biographies and historical fiction mostly, counting it toward our history studies. I think I was 8 or 9 when she read Tisha to us. It was about a young woman who took a job teaching school in rural Alaska in the early 1900s.
I was fascinated.
I guess that was really the beginning for me, of wanting to come to Alaska. I re-read the book a couple of times in my teenage years too. As I was finishing college, I was contemplating getting dual certification (Alaska and my then-homestate of Washington have a reciprocal certification agreement) and I was going to come teach for a year or two in the middle of nowhere in Alaska, save up my money, and then go back south and get married. I was going to do what Tisha did...only Tisha found a spouse up in Alaska and stayed...and, well, if that happened that was ok too.
Only I found a spouse before I got a chance to go to Alaska and get rich. So I stayed poor and got married, and I'm not sure whether Alaska was still on my radar or not...I certainly wasn't thinking about it in any concrete way. But less than 4 years into our marriage we had an opportunity to move our family to Alaska, and even though we had never made serious plans to do so, we both jumped at the opportunity. Sometimes, something is so in your blood that you don't have to talk about it. I hadn't realized that my husband felt the call of the wild too, but he did, and we came.
And when we got here, we realized that it was home.

In the early part of our marriage, we had talked about buying a little piece of land where we could have a big garden, some fruit trees, and maybe raise some chickens or something. Now that we have realized that Alaska is home--more particularly that this region is where we want to stay for the long term (employment permitting)--now we have begun researching what exactly will be involved in creating an independent, sustainable, mostly-off-grid homestead for our family in this area. We've been getting books from the library, and reading up on everything from yurts and earthbag homes to cob houses and underground dwellings. We're learning about building with logs and how to use passive solar. We plan on heating with wood and geothermal energy, and will probably have a sod roof. We're reading about wind and hydropower. We know we'll need to build a greenhouse for our fruit trees and some of our vegetables. We're studying up on breeds of chickens and sheep to find which ones are gentle with children, which ones are hearty in cold weather, and which ones are the best for eating (and eggs, and wool...) The more we talk about it, the more excited we become. We know we need to sell our house down south before we can buy land here, and we don't want to buy land until we have tenure with a school district, so as to avoid what happened last time we bought a house (getting laid off and not being able to find another job within commuting distance of the place we owned!) So this is a 5 year plan at least...but it is a plan, and we are doing our reading, and it's exciting every time we talk about it.
Lots of people talk about things, but if the last few years are anything to go by, we are not just talkers, we are doers. We are the people who hold hands, hold our breath, and just jump already.

Recently, a fellow Alaskan friend recommended the book Arctic Homestead by Norma Cobb. She was another jumper. She and her husband took their five small children and settled in the wilderness north of Fairbanks in the 1970s. I admit I am not that daring, I have no desire to be that far north. I'll stay on my very sub-arctic peninsula thank you...but reading her story was inspiring, and reminded me of the reasons why I want to live off the land, with the land, in the land...and why I want to do it here. (It was also a thoroughly delightful read, so whether you have a homesteader's mindset or not I recommend the book!)


I conclude with a post from the book that seems to capture the way I feel about living in Alaska.

"There was breathtaking beauty in the howling of the wolves, the glisten and sparkle of new snow beneath lights, the splendid aurora borealis that never failed to fill me with wonder. It was as though God hung the great curtains of fire to fill space with myriad colors of dancing forms and vast spears and shafts of light flashing from one horizon to the next in a dazzling display of His power and majesty."

Garlic and Sapphires by Ruth Reichl

on amazon here

I did it again. I browsed the 'new arrivals' section at the library. Interesting things happen when I do that, and this was no exception.

Garlic and Sapphires? Two of my favorite things! So I picked up the book.
The subtitle read "the secret life of a critic in disguise."

Whatever, let's go back to the garlic part.

So I brought the book home.


Ruth Reichl is a famous food critic (I  had no idea). She had been famous for a while in LA, and then was hired to be the big new food critic for the NYTimes. Of course, all the big restaurants in NY planned to show her a good time so they could get their four stars...only Ruth was smart about people as well as about food, and she beat them at their own game. She worked up some elaborate disguises and went to these restaurants as normal people, rather than as her famous self. Oh she went as herself too of course, but then she wrote about all the visits. Boy oh boy were some chefs in for some surprises!!! She called them on their two-facedness where she found it, and withheld stars for it too. Ooooo, so mean! But so so right!

Of course most of the book follows her visits to various fancy places and discusses all manner of foods (many of them mouth-watering). She writes about her process in inventing each disguise. She also talks about her family--and how she goes to a place where she "normally wouldn't be caught dead eating" except that it's her sons birthday and he really wants to go...and she realizes that reputations are silly things, and that the quality of a night out is more about the company than the cost of the meal. She goes with friends to little hidden ethnic eateries and revels in authentic food that is excellent even if it's not 'posh.' At one highly acclaimed (but very poor) restaurant she even throws off her disguise in disgust mid-meal...but I won't ruin that story. It was very very funny.

While food and disguises are all very fun, Reichl's down to earth style was the thing I liked most about the book. It wasn't just that she was trying to get the good stories, although of course she was. It wasn't just that she was looking for the best food, although she was finding that too. In the long run, she also finds that the process of 'getting real' for her reviews helps her 'get real' about her life too, and leads to her eventual decision to leave her post as a full-time food critic and to come home to cook more with her family, which is where food is best anyway. With a happy ending like that, of course I liked the book.

"The Soul of Sex" by Thomas Moore

"The Soul of Sex: culturing life as an act of love"
by Thomas Moore was such an interesting book, and with such an interesting thesis. I stumbled across it at the library and read the inside flap and had to bring it home.

Here is an excerpt from the flap:

In our age of science and psychology it's tempting to think of human sexuality in terms of biology and interpersonal relationships. But this new book...regards sex as an experience of the soul and emphasizes the themes of fantasy, desire, meaning, and morality. In [this book] Moore turns especially to religion, mythology, literature, rites, stories, and visual imagery [like classic art] that see sex in some of the most profound mysteries of life. He finds spirituality inherent in sex and at the same time explores the many ways in which spiritual values can sometimes wound our sexuality. He recommends chastity and celibacy for everyone--as aspects of sexuality and not only as literal lifestyles--and presents them as a means of developing a sensuous spirituality.
The Soul of Sex also establishes the principle that one can't have a fully satisfying sex life in a world that is asexual and antierotic. Thomas Moore recommends many ways in which society could tone down its moralism and create a public life that is erotic, one that affirms desire and pleasure. He sees widespread attention to sex in the media as a symptom of our failure to find a positive place for sex in the culture, and he spells out an Epicurean way of life in which the simple, deep pleasures of good food, friends, family, home, and intimacy with nature provide and appropriate erotic base for a fulfilling sex life.

The author is conservative catholic and was even a monk for a while. It's been interesting for me to read about sexuality from a distinctly moral perspective (although he does make the specification that 'moral' is not the same as 'moralistic'...in other words, having morals isn't the same as being all hoity-toity about stuff). So much of what is out there now is from a more 'natural man' point of view, and this is definitely not. He is very pro-marriage and pro-fidelity, and also pro-spirituality. As he says "If there is any substance in the common sentiment that sex is sacred, it would seem appropriate to explore that sacredness in religious terms."
This book also isn't erotica, or a 'how to' in any sense. Like I said, it's philosophy.
He talks a lot about archtypes--Aphrodite of course, but also Artemis (the virgin), Eros, and even Christ. I certainly never thought I'd read something about Jesus as sexual (he doesn't say sexually active, merely pro-sexuality), but it's entirely respectful and the author makes some very thought provoking points.
He talks about sexual symbols such as the phallus (which is more than just a penis, it's a symbol of honor, power, vitality, humor, playfulness, etc) and also the vagina (which he suggests is a symbolic harbor, a source of stability, calmness, and safety).
It's really fascinating to look at sex and sexuality from a more encompassing perspective--as symbols of larger (sacred) things. Or as a rite that reminds us of the sacred.

The book is full of highly quotable things, so rather than try to talk about the book any more I will just let it speak for itself...

In modern life sex is one of the few numinous areas we have left, numinosity being the aura of awe and mystery usually associated with religious feeling. We have destroyed the mystery of the planets and stars with our telescopes and roving machines. We have diminished the numinosity of nature through our countless studies and exploitation. But fortunately we have not yet reduced the power of sex to stir deep desire and to compel contemplation.

If we understand marriage only as a literal living arrangement, then it entails a literal giving up of the solitary life. But as an initiation of the soul, marriage takes us deeper into ourselves... We can imagine marriage as something we do for ourselves. Marriage is not a surrender to another person but to another condition of life, one that can be deeply rewarding. (208)

In our symptoms lie the seeds of our revitalization. If we want to know how to gain new life and fresh sensibility, all we have to do is look closely and appreciatively at our problems. We have to be careful not to leap into compensation--championing the opposite of what our symptoms embody. Rampant pornography, for instance, suggests that we might consider the value of sexual imagery. Rampant divorce suggests that our idea of marriage might need some space. Rape suggests that we have not yet learned to use the power of love. Excessive sex in the media suggestions that we have not built an erotically rich society. (235)
Modern society's combined moralism against and obsession with sex indicates that we have not yet discovered the deeper meaning of sexuality. We think of it in purely personal terms, in contrast with many cultures that treat sex as a sacred cosmic force. We try to keep sex hidden, apparently thinking that what we cant' see won't hurt us. But like all powerful elements in the soul, sex needs to be manifested. Otherwise we suffer not only from the sudden return of the repressed--sex breaking through our repression in negative and uncontrollable ways--but also from a diminishment of life and vitality. Sex gives life color and vivacity. When we hide it out of fear, our personal lives and our social lie become flat. (276-7)

And finally, an idea that was on my mind a great deal this last week as I drove up and down the billboard-lined, 8 (soon to be 12)-lane scar of pavement that is I-15 in Utah (and thought about the pretty little tree-lined, winding, 2-lane road that I live off of here in Alaska)

It seems clear to me that the plague of sexual images that fill the internet and line our city streets, and the so-called gratuitous sex that spices most grown-up movies are exaggerated, autonomous, and noisome because we don't understand the importance of a sexy road or an appealing building or a sensuous workplace. The principle at play is simple: whatever we don't have the imagination to weave into our human lives beautifully and intimately will haunt us in the form of autonomous temptation and shadow values. There seems to be no middle ground. Either we build a beautiful road or the ugly version will soon begin to destroy the culture we are striving so hard to make. As always, our choices are basic: either Eros or Thanatos, sex or death. (248)

If we'll loosen up and let a little more 'sexy' into our world, and embrace the sexuality within us as the holy and powerful thing that it is, then we won't have so much negative sexuality bursting through the seams of repression. And we'll all be happier besides.

"Hold Me Tight & Tango Me Home" by Maria Finn

I frequently browse the "new arrivals" section at our library. It's next to the computers and DVDs, so I can look at books while my kids play on the computer or pick out movies. I also like that it's a little bit of every genre all there together, so I can get a bit of anything without wandering around the library. Probably half of what I have read in the last year has come from that one shelf...and this book was one of them...
When I saw Hold Me Tight & Tango Me Home I didn't look at what genre it was. I suspected it would be some kind of romantic comedy--that's what it looked like. Actually I think I was expecting something like Drunk, Divorced, and Covered in Cat Hair (which is a story of a woman who "learned to knit after he split" and is quite funny and geeky in a knitty fashion...). But it was not like that at all. It is a memoir, and begins when Maria finds out that her husband is cheating on her. First she packs all his things and throws them down the stairs. Then she calls her lawyer. Then she signs up for tango lessons.
With tango history and technique woven throughout, this is more than just a story of a woman sorting her life out again. As she learns tango, she begins to apply dancing techniques to her life: balance, leading, following, moving in synchronicity with someone, or moving in harmonious opposition. In short, this book put into words how I feel about dancing. Why I have--and still do--think of myself as a dancer.
I was part of a performing ballroom dance team for about a year (age 17-18), and all through college I took dance classes and attended social dances. My husband doesn't dance though, so I have had little opportunity to dance since getting married. He asked me once why I referred to myself as a dancer when I wasn't really dancing anymore. I can tell you--it's because I still feel it. Music moves my body, as it does for many people, but it's more than that. Dancing is a way of feeling, but also a way of expressing. It's a pure expression, uncluttered by imperfect words and without need of translation. I told my husband he should read this book--I think it might help him understand me a little better.


(Incidentally, there are two of my readers to whom I want to specifically recommend this book: Dad, and Mae. Just got get it already. You'll like it.)

"The Body Project" by Joan Jacobs Brumberg (and a challenge for my readers)

At the library, I recently stumbled across The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls. I wasn't sure what to expect, but I thought I vaguely remembered having heard of it, so I brought it home.
Oh wow. I absolutely recommend this to every woman, to every mother of daughters, to every teacher of girls. It should be required reading. This book is packed with history (and numerous primary sources including many diary entries). It recounts the changes that have taken place in American culture specifically during the 20th century, and the way that adolescence has changed from being a "coming of age" into being a "coming into obsession with our bodies." Even as we know more about our parts we seem to understand less about ourselves. It's something I think many of us are aware of (I've written on similar thoughts before), but the book was eye-opening for me in explaining more clearly the evolution of this change.
The following excerpt (p54-55) gives one example via menarche and menstruation (emphases added by me):

In preparing girls for menarche, we still tend to emphasize selecting a sanitary product rather than the meaning of the responsibility that menstruation implies. However, we know from the experience of generations of American women [that] being handed a pamphlet or shown a movie is not very satisfying, and that young women want meaningful exchanges about female sexuality as well as the best techniques for coping with the vagaries of menstrual blood. In a world where the female body is sexualized so early and the stakes are so high, it now seems obvious that it is not enough to teach girls how to be clean and dainty.
When contemporary American girls begin to menstruate, they think of hygiene, not fertility. That is the American way, and it is taken for granted--as if it were part of the "natural order." But the historical "disconnect" between menstruation and reproduction is actually quite modern, and it has important psychological implications for how girls think about themselves and what kind of women they become. It was strategically helpful for our grandmothers and mothers to cast menstruation as "only" a matter of hygiene, in order to offset Victorian myths about its debilitating effects. In today's world, however, that dismissiveness means something else. In fact, it sets the stage for obsessive overattention to other aspects of the changing body, such as size and shape.

I think an important realization is how pervasive this is in our culture.

Pervasive: like a virulent disease.

I mentioned this book to my best friend, and she made a revealing comment. She has recently lost almost 50lbs, and she said that since losing the weight she is even more body-conscious than she was before. I haven't seen her in some time, but I've seen recent photos and my first thought is always to comment how good she looks...how she LOOKS. Yes, she does look wonderful, but you know, she was always beautiful. She is kind and intelligent and graceful and talented and lovely, and she was my best friend before she lost the weight. She is still the same person I love, regardless of how she looks. And yet, when I see a photo, I'm ashamed to say that her newly-slender figure is the first thing I notice. What a statement about the pervasiveness of this body-image obsession, even from someone like me who is more-than-normally aloof from it.

I've been down this road myself. In my teens I had a really nice figure ("36-28-36" with blue eyes, long hair, fairly clear skin...) and yet I still found things to be self-conscious and nitpicky about. My hair was too thin, it was frizzy, and it didn't curl 'right.' My fingers were short and stubby and my nails were too. My toes were ugly. On the one hand, family members and adults told me I was beautiful, but on the other hand when I looked in the mirror I saw a girl who wasn't getting asked on any dates, so therefore I knew something was wrong with me. I wasn't entirely sure what it was, but I knew there had to be something.
For the most part, I have learned to be comfortable in my own skin...but even still I find myself finding--even searching--for things to complain about. I just measured this morning: 9 months after birthing a second baby, I am a "39-31-40" and I have returned to my pre-pregnancy weight. I'm not as thin as I was in high school or college, but I'm still slender and curvy. I still have blue eyes and long hair and clear skin. By all accounts I have nothing to complain about...and yet I still have low self-image days. The hair, the hands, the saggy breasts, the wiggly behind, the stretch-marked everything... But I am healthy! I have a spouse who thinks I am beautiful! How is this cultural distaste-for-self SO pervasive that it gets through to even the best of us?
I don't have the answers, I really don't. I wish I did. I do know that if I ever have daughters I will make every effort to build them up against the tidal wave of dissatisfaction.

I have thought of something which I'm going to try for myself, and I invite my readers to try it too. The book talked about how the obsessions with clear skin and perfect teeth and thinness became common right about the same time that scales and mirrors started being present in homes. For most of history a woman didn't know her weight or see her face unless she happened across a scale or mirror in a public place. Can you imagine how we might perceive ourselves if we weren't constantly thrown numbers and images like that?!
So this is my challenge: for 24 hours, don't step on a scale and don't look at yourself in a mirror. Tack up a pillowcase over your bathroom mirror if you need to, but don't look! Strike back at this image-obsessed culture, by being willing to be your (inner) self for a whole day, without fixating on our outer appearance. Of course you should comb your hair and otherwise care for yourself, but don't preen, don't 'fix yourself,' just take on the world as your own self.
Do you think you can do it? I sure would love to hear about it if you do.

Kids are Worth It by Barbara Coloroso

(I actually read "Kids are Worth it: Giving Your Child the Gift of Inner Discipline" some time ago, and want to re-read it, but this is based off the notes I took at the time)

"It's not control or compliance that you are looking for;
it's calm and cooperation."

As I stated in my prior post about compliance vs cooperation, I feel that it is more important to teach our children how to think and problem solve by themselves than it is to just boss them around all the time. This is more or less the mindset behind this book.

The author, Barbara Coloroso, makes three basic points:

1. Kids are worth it. It is worth the time and effort that it takes to raise our children. We are glad that we have them. We want them. We love them.
2. "I will not treat a child in a way that I myself would not want to be treated." Because children are people too, and deserve to keep their dignity intact, including when they make mistakes or do something wrong.
3. If it works, and leaves my dignity intact, and leaves the child's dignity intact, then it is a good solution.

Her guide for dealing with specific issues that arise is as follows:
Show kids what they have done ~ If the child doesn't realize what he did, then no consequence is going to be useful. Especially with younger children this step may involve helping them to understand why the behavior was a problem (eg, hitting is not ok because it hurts people)
Give them ownership of the problem ~ this is not my problem, it is the child's problem. It's not about me being embarrassed or frustrated, it is about something that the child did and about something that he needs to learn.
Give them options for solving the problem (as they get old enough to begin thinking--I think by age 3 or so--they should participate in the thinking of options. Remember that the goal is to teach them to do this themselves, not to just boss them around! "Plan B" is a great methodology for this) ~ Come up with several possible courses of action. If you are not willing to actually do it, then don't suggest it! Once the options are on the table, the child should choose which course to follow--remember, this is his problem, not yours.
Always leave their dignity intact ~ the goal of consequences should never be to embarrass or shame a child, but merely to teach them.

Coloroso also offers a guide ("RSVP") for what constitutes a reasonable consequence:
Reasonable ~ it makes sense to both parent and child, and is appropriate (natural/logical)
Simple ~ (does this one need to be explained?!)
Valuable ~ the child will actually learn something from this course of action...oh yes, and they will learn what you were hoping to teach!! (in other words, they learn how to make a better choice next time, rather than "I'll be more careful to not get caught next time!")
Practical ~ this also seems obvious, but some people forget about it anyway...one time we were problem solving together and Wolf proposed a solution that might have worked except it involved my micromanaging his life over the coming two weeks. I have other children and *gasp* other responsibilities! I told him that I was happy to help him, but that that particular proposal would not work because I could not do that much. He understood that it was not practical, and we choose something else.

I think that my favorite part of the book was where she talked about finding alternatives to 'no.' Her point was that if you are yelling "No!" at your child every 5 minutes, he will begin to tune it out, and in the moment when it really matters (eg: as he's running into the street) he will neither hear nor respond to you. So, instead of always saying no, Coloroso proposes using alternatives like "yes, but later" or "give me a minute [to think about it]" or (my favorite--for older kids) "Why? Talk me into it!" (Children can come up with a variety of fascinating reasons why they should be allowed to do this or that, and frankly I think a lot of them are valid!)
I find the overuse of 'no' to be a very interesting topic, and I have discussed it in more depth in a separate post.

Here are a few bullet points from my notes:

• A child is a person--an individual. Let them be independent when they need to be. Let them--or help them--discover who they are, and then let them be themselves (so long as it's not physically, mentally, or morally threatening).
• When you give a child a choice, there should be no strings attached. Present choices that are all equal rather than some that are "better" or "worse" than the other. Do NOT get upset if the child's choice is not your own!!
• Good parents neither smother their children's feelings nor steal them. They acknowledge their own feelings and take responsible and purposeful action about them. They allow and teach their children to do the same. They do not judge the feelings of another.
• When encouraging children to find solutions, have them define what they WILL do rather than what they WON'T do. For example "I won't hit" vs "If I'm upset I will go out of the room." (It's much easier to do something than to not do something. Remember this post?!)

She also has some suggestions about problem solving and also addresses the issue of tattling. I'll cover those in separate posts in the coming week. ☺



My post was featured in the Gentle Discipline Fair!
Visit BabyDustDiaries.com to see the monthly fairs and other great Gentle Discipline resources.

In Defense of Food by Michael Pollen

I recently finished a most fabulous book: Michael Pollen's In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto. I heartily recommend it, and I do so with the note that it will probably make you re-evaluate not only what you eat but also how you eat it. Pollen says so much and says it so well that, rather than try to summarize, I will simply quote liberally from the book:

"The trend toward simplification of our food continues up the chain. As we've seen, processing [foods] depletes them of many nutrients, a few of which are then added back...Fortifying processed foods with missing nutrients is surely better than leaving them out, but food science can add back only the small handful of nutrients that food science recognizes as important today. What is it overlooking? [S]cience doesn't know nearly enough to compensate for everything that processing does to whole foods. We know how to break down a kernel of corn or grain of wheat into its chemical parts, but we have no idea how to put it back together again. Destroying complexity is a lot easier than creating it." (115-6)

After describing the findings of several people who studied indigenous peoples from all over the world (and found that all the people were healthy on these natural diets, even though the diets themselves varied greatly) Pollen comments that “The human animal is adapted to, and apparently can thrive on, an extraordinary range of different diets, but the Western Diet, however you define it, does not seem to be one of them.” (100)
He discusses the history of nutrition in the western world--seeking for foods that would be cheap, give lots of energy, and be quick and easy to prepare and eat. I appreciated that Pollen doesn't criticize the motives or the people involved so much as explaining why the results have been (and are) problematic. He goes into the nutritive and metabolic differences between white and whole wheat flour, and spends most of a chapter on what we have recently learned--but long ignorantly overlooked--about the differences between Omega 3s and Omega 6s. He takes on the matter of organic vs conventionally grown crops, and concludes that "very simply, we have been breeding crops for yield, not nutritional quality, and when you breed for one thing, you invariably sacrifice another." (121) (If you have ever smelled one of those huge fancy hybrid tea roses you probably know that they smell like nothing. On the other hand the wilder roses with the little blossoms are euphoric!) Pollen continues "Halweil cites several studies demonstrating that when older crop varieties are grown side by side with modern cultivars, the older ones typically have lower yields but substantially higher nutrient levels. USDA researchers recently found that breeding to 'improve' wheat varieties over the past 130 years (a period during which yields of grain per acre tripled) had reduced levels of iron by 28 percent and zinc and selenium by roughly a third." (121)

Finally, Pollen concludes the book with a list of guidelines, or as he describes them "eating algorithms, mental devices for thinking through our food choices." They are summarized right on the cover of the book: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. Within the book of course he expounds upon each point. I have not copied all of his guidelines here, but this list is representative, and makes a good jumping off point for improving your diet--and your health. ☺

"The more eaters who vote with their forks for a different kind of food, the more commonplace and accessible such food will become." (14)

EAT FOOD (FOOD DEFINED)

• Don't eat anything that your great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food.
• Don't eat anything incapable of rotting.
• Avoid food products containing ingredients that are A) unfamiliar B) unpronounceable C) more than five in number or D) that include high fructose corn syrup. (He adds that none of these things alone is evil per se, but that they are all indications of a highly processed food, and therefore an undesirable one.)
• Avoid food products that make health claims. ("For a food product to make health claims on it's package it must first have a package, so right off the bat it's more likely to be a processed than a whole food." Futhermore going to the trouble to secure those official health claims from the FDA involves time and money, and typically only the big food companies have that.)
• Get out of the supermarket whenever possible (try farmer's markets or, what a notion, growing your own garden!)
• Shake the hand that feeds you (I love that one!)
  

MOSTLY PLANTS (WHAT TO EAT)

• Eat mostly plants, especially leaves (because different parts of plants have different nutrients, and as the western diet has become more and more seed-based we have become less and less healthy).
• You are what you eat eats too (in other words, "the diet of the animals we eat has a bearing on the nutritional quality, and healthfulness, of the food itself.")
• Eat like an omnivore (eat a variety of foods!)
• Eat well-grown food from healthy soils (this more or less means organic, but certification is expensive and many smaller farms have the good foods in spite of not having the sticker).
• Eat wild foods when you can.
• Seek a more traditional diet, and regard nontraditional foods with skepticism. ("I'm inclined to think any traditional diet will do; if it wasn't a healthy regimen, the diet and the people who followed it wouldn't still be around.")
• Don't look for the magic bullet in the traditional diet (health comes from an overall pattern of good eating, not from ingesting large doses of one specific nutrient).

"A diet based on quantity rather than quality has ushered a new creature onto the world stage: the human being who manages to be both overfed and undernourished, two characteristics seldom found in the same body in the long natural history of our species." (122)

NOT TOO MUCH (HOW TO EAT)

• Pay more, eat less (Spend more money for the higher-quality foods, spend more time in preparing them, don't overeat)
• Eat meals (not just snacks. Interact with your family/fellow eaters as you sit together.)
• Do all your eating at a table (Don't eat in the car or in front of the television.)
• Don't get your fuel from the same place your car does ☺
• Try not to eat alone
  
• Eat slowly (eat deliberately and mindfully. Also, it takes around 20 minutes for your brain to get the message that the stomach is full, so if you finish a meal in less than that time you're obviously not listening to your gut.)
• Cook and, if you can, plant a garden ("To take part in the intricate and endlessly interesting processes of providing for our sustenance is the surest way to escape the culture of fast food and the values implicit in it: that food should be fast, cheap, and easy; that food is a product of industry not nature; that food is fuel, and not a form of communion...")

"I no longer think it's possible to separate our bodily health from the health of the environment from which we eat or the environment in which we eat or, for that matter, from the the health of our general outlook about food (and health). If my exploration of the food chain have taught me anything, it's that all the links in it are in fact linked: the health of the soil to the health of the plants and animals we eat to the health of the food culture in which we eat them to the health of the eater, in body as well as mind." (144)

"Natural Cures 'They' Don't Want You to Know About" by Kevin Trudeau

I had been hearing of this book for some time but never read it. I remember seeing part of an interview a couple of years ago and basically what Trudeau said was "there is a cure for ___ but I can't tell you what it is cuz they would sue me, so you will have to read the book to find out." He repeated this about a half dozen ailments, and I came away with the feeling like this guy is out to sell books and may or may not have anything very helpful to say therein. I'm always sceptical when someone says "you have to buy the book to find out" you know?

Well, apparently a friend of my in-laws saw something about the book and was impressed and got the book for them. They have some (little) interest in natural health, and my father-in-law read the book...or at least started reading it...I don't know whether he actually finished it (there was a bookmark just a few chapters in ☺) His conclusion was that the guy is out to sell books, (that makes two for two here) and he was very sceptical of the content of the book.

So while we were staying with them, my father-in-law asked if I had read the book, and I said no. He asked if I'd like to, and I said um, sure. So he gave it to me. As I started reading I noticed several things immediately:

1. Trudeau says a lot of things that I've heard before about both natural and mainstream medical practices--some of these things I agree with and some of which I've never seen evidence for (more on that in a moment).


2. He is convinced that the medical community as a whole is in one giant conspiracy to keep us all sick so that they will make money.


3. Throughout the book, he has a very unprofessional writing style. He repeats himself a lot, saying the same things and talking in circles around topics (while often not really making a discernable point). He also writes in a very defensive manner ("I would tell you but they would sue me and burn this book, I have the letter from the FTC that says so"). Worst of all though is point 4.


4. He does not provide references or sources or verification for anything he says. This is very troubling to me--why should I trust him over anyone else when I don't know his sources?! He says that on his webpage he has all the references about which study he means when he states that "a study was done which found ___." However he never gives even a simple "In [year] an article appeared in [publication] about a study which said ___" in the actual text of his book. Even if I've heard the same information from other sources, not documenting the source is unprofessional and (in my opinion) just plain fishy. In fairness I should note that he does have two chapters of the book ("Not Convinced?" and "Still Not Convinced?") where he gives lists of articles and books which he says validate the things he is saying. Still though, unprofessional and just poor writing.

If you have been a reader here for more than about two days you probably know that I am a proponent of natural medicine, or, rather, that I'm a great proponent of taking the path of least-intervention whenever possible (which usually leads me down more 'natural' paths).

Here are some things where I agree with Trudeau:

• Medical 'fact' is (and always was) not really facts. It is merely the educated opinion based on the knowledge and research of the time. (Bloodletting was once a cure-all, bodily fluids were considered to be composed of four humors, and in the 1920s smoking was touted as healthy...clearly medical facts change with time.)


• The medical world (drug makers + doctors) makes their money off our being sick.


• Being sick all the time is not normal (he suggests that the annual flu or even the 'common cold' shouldn't be common in a healthy individual, and that all the bigger stuff from diabetes to impotence to cancer should definitely not be common).


• In spite of numerous new drugs and new treatments, the population of the USA is more sick than ever, including still dying of cancer at the same rate as we did 50 years ago (and being infected with it much more often).


• Mainstream medicine treats symptoms, not causes, which is why it doesn't work very well (why we stay sick, or why the drug may solve one problem while causing another).


• The medical world in general (from drug researchers & manufacturers to the FDA) is out there to make money, so if something simple and cheap and (most importantly) non-patentable (ie, natural) comes along that solves the problem, they will try to dismiss or even squelch it so that it doesn't cut into their bottom line.


• We see advertising for mainstream drugs (and not for natural cures) because that's where the money is--and the TV/radio producers don't want to lose the hefty amounts of advertising funding that they get from the pharmaceutical companies, so they won't advertise the little guys who are in conflict with them.(You may remember my little rant about this topic in my recent post on healthcare reform


• The medical associations are out there to protect the doctors (including their incomes)...not to protect the patients. Therefore, when you see a statement from the American Medical Association (AMA), American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), etc, you should remember that they are looking out for the doctors, not for you, and thus the statement should be taken with a grain of salt (and verified with your own research if at all possible).


• There are effective natural (non-patentable) alternatives to mainstream medical treatments/drugs, but we don't hear about them because of the reasons listed above. These options include things from vitamins, supplements, herbs and homeopathic drugs, to chiropractic care, parasitic cleanses, exercise routines, and special diets. (Please note that I think some of these options hold more water than others...but I do agree with the basic premise that there are effective alternatives to much if not all of mainstream medicine.)


• A great deal of what we eat, drink, breathe, and come in contact with in our daily lives is putting toxins into our body, and reducing exposure to those toxins (and working to eradicate the ones already within us) will improve our health. (He feels that most if not all health problems stem from toxins in our bodies, nutritional deficencies, or stress.)

He goes on to present a list of ways to eradicate (or at least reduce) our personal exposure to toxins, improve our personal nutrition, and reduce stress. I find that I agree (to varying degrees) with much of his toxin list, and almost all of his nutrition and stress lists. Honestly, I don't know that the rest of book is worth reading, but I would recommend the chapter with those lists.

Some things where I don't agree so much:

• All drugs (prescription or non-prescription) are intentionally made with negative side effects in order to keep us buying more drugs/treatments. Trudeau even goes so far as to suggest that some fatal drugs are knowingly released so that the manufacturers can get a few years of income off them before they are pulled from the market--because the money matters that much. (On the one hand, yes, I agree that most of these drugs have scary side-effects, which is why I am typically skeptical about them--especially new ones--but I don't agree with the notion that they are made that way intentionally...it's a little bit too conspiracy-theory for me.)


• All those working in the world of mainstream medicine want us to stay sick so that they will stay in business. (Sorry, but I just don't believe that every little family practice doctor is that malicious...yes I can easily believe it about the CEOs of big pharma, but not about every single researcher or doctor out there.)

As I said, he's got a massive conspiracy theory complex going on. I think he has some good advice about specific lifestyle/nutrition choices, and based on what I do know of natural medicine I think most if not all of his advice there is probably pretty good too. However the book is so poorly written that he discredits himself with almost every word.

"The Explosive Child" by Ross W Greene

The Explosive Child: A New Approach for Understanding and Parenting Easily Frustrated, Chronically Inflexible Children by Ross W Greene, Ph.D.

I must begin this review by stating that I think that the book has a somewhat unfortunate title. At least to me, it sounds terribly negative, and that's something I try to avoid in parenting books. (I will never forget the day I picked up Dr James Dobson's "The Strong-Willed Child" wherein he said that some kids are just stubborn and we must basically beat it out of them otherwise they will end up sending themselves to hell. Really, that's what he said! It was terrible!) In any case, TEC is not like that at all. It's actually a very positive and proactive sort of book.

One point he does make right at the beginning is that some children explode (yelling, tantruming, hurting others, etc) while others implode (shutting down, ignoring, walking away from the situation, etc). Children with different temperaments will of course react to things differently, but according to Dr Greene, the causes are essentially the same, so can be treated with the same method.

Dr Greene's basic premise is that children do well if they can (rather than the more commonly taught children do well if they want to). In other words, if the child knows the rules, and has motivation to follow them, but is consistently misbehaving anyway, then it is because he has "a developmental delay--a learning disability of sorts--in the skills of flexibility and frustration tolerance" (p 15). In other words, they don't misbehave because they want to, they misbehave because they literally don't have the skills to process situations and behave in a more appropriate or adaptive manner. These kids don't need more incentives, punishments, or consequences--they need to be taught the skills that they are lacking.
Greene explains that "An explosive outburst--like other maladaptive behavior--occurs when the cognitive demands being placed upon a person outstrip that person's capacity to respond adaptively" (p 17). I know that's a lot of big words and technical terms all strung together, but take a minute to go back and read it again, because it's really critical as it underpins the whole philosophy of the book.

Having established that these children are misbehaving (and exploding/imploding) because they lack the skills to do otherwise, Greene then lays out the skills which are commonly lacking (different children will lack different skills of course, and many lack more than one):

• Executive Skills (shifting from one activity to another, organization/planning, putting ideas into action, and separating emotional response from the thinking necessary to solve the problem)
• Language Processing Skills (categorizing & expressing emotion, identifying & articulating his own needs, and solving problems)
• Emotion Regulation Skills (when they become tired, irritated, scared, or otherwise upset their emotion gets in the way of their thinking, so they become irrational, inflexible, frustrated, and explosive)
• Cognitive Flexibility Skills ("black-and-white thinkers stuck in a grey world" who struggle with adapting to changes in plans or changes in routine/schedule)
• Social Skills (picking up social cues, interpreting those cues correctly, figuring out appropriate responses in social situations, and realizing how his behavior affects others)

Dr Greene is quick to clarify that these should be used as explanations, not excuses. In other words, this process of identifying lagging skills is just to help us understand what we need to consider as we begin to teach the child how to gain those skills--it is not an excuse for his maladaptive behavior.
The second part of identifying the problem is to consider triggers--that is, the situations or events that tend to set the child off. Many children are triggered by being tired, hungry, frustrated, or overstimulated. Sometimes just the presence of a certain person (or type of person) can be a trigger. Other triggers include things like being corrected, having an unexpected change in plans, or having to switch from one activity to another. Hopefully most parents already know that reducing triggers can reduce explosions, but sometimes triggering situations cannot be avoided, and that is where Plan B comes in.

Dr Greene discusses 3 plans: Plans A, B, and C.
Plan A is where the Adult forces his will on the child (it's what most of us were probably raised with--a "because I said so" sort of mentality, and when applied to a child who lacks the skills to measure up to the adult's expectations, it is a recipe for disaster...not to mention that it's not very respectful of the child!).
Plan C is where the adult capitulates and just lets the Child do what he pleases (which is not respectful of the adult, so is also problematic).
Plan B is to utilize what Dr Greene calls "collaborative problem solving" (CPS) to find solutions that will solve the concerns of Both adult and child. So of course Plan B is the ideal.
There is a time for Plan A--when the kid is running into the road of course you should grab him and stop him in spite of his protests. There is also a time for Plan C--when you realize that the issue at hand is not that big a deal or that your expectation was unrealistic. For the rest of the time, CPS can be a great tool to help parent and child work out solutions to deal with the immediate problems...and over time, as the parent guides them through the thinking processes of CPS, the child should be able to develop the skills he's been lacking.

Collaborative Problem Solving (in it's simplest form) consists of 3 steps:
1--empathize with the child (get their concern on the table, and let them see that you care about them and their concern)
2--define the problem (get your concern on the table too)
3--invite the child to propose solutions (you can make propositions of your own as well, but most children will have a higher investment in something they thought of, so if it seems like a decent solution, by all means try their idea! Remember that "Plan B is not 'tricky' Plan A!" (p 108).)
An acceptable solution is one that is realistic, doable, and mutually satisfactory. If it fails to meet any of those criteria, then keep proposing solutions until you find something that meets all three.

I highly recommend this book, particularly for any parent who has a child who consistently misbehaves even though he knows the rules and has been repeatedly punished for breaking them. It had never occurred to me that my academically advanced son might be struggling with certain mental skills, but as I read this book I repeatedly had the thought "that sounds a lot like my kid." I am just beginning to try CPS with him (Hubby hasn't read the book yet), and the first couple of attempts floundered a bit...I think he's used to us pushing our agenda (Plan A) and is struggling to identify what his own needs/wants actually are, because (unfortunately) they have often been ignored in the past as we tried to force him to do things our way. But the second try went better than the first, and I look forward to increased peace for all of us as we get the hang of this.
By the way, I did explain the basics here, but if you think these ideas would be helpful for you or your family, please don't rely on my version, please do get the book and read it for yourself. Dr Greene gives much more thorough explanations than I did, including sample conversations of how to apply CPS, common mistakes that parents make when trying to utilize CPS, and ideas for how to work with kids who don't want to work with you.


For those with school aged children, Dr Greene has also written Lost at School which teaches the same philosophy with school applications.

"Manipulating Parents" by Paul W Robinson

The first, and most important, point of this book is that children do not try to manipulate their parents per se, they simply seek ways to get what they want. In other words, their intentions are pure, but sometimes their methods are problematic.
I do agree with that basic premise--that children often engage in manipulating behavior in their efforts to get what they want. I have mixed responses to the author's recommendations for how to respond to these behaviors, but here I will go into the parts which with I agree.

Robinson begins by outlining classic methods of manipulation:

• ask for more, settle for less (child asks for 10 more minutes, haggles down to 5, but still gets more time which is what he wanted)
• repeating (they ask so many times that the parent wears out and gives in)
• setting parents against each other ("but mom said..." "dad would let me...")
• shaping (asks for something small, then more, then more)
• wearing out the parent (they squirm until let go, ignore until parent gives up, etc)
• follow the crowd ("but everybody is doing it")
• playing favorites ("you let __ do ___, you like him better")
• threats ("I'll run away") or tantrums
• public places (they know you'll respond differently in front of friends or a crowd)

He then expresses that it is important for the parent to be "in the driver's seat" and to not let the child run things. Now here is a point where I don't wholly agree...as I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't want my children to grow up to be yes-men, I want them to be thinking individuals. On the other hand, (to stick with his driving analogy), my kids only have learners permits, whereas I am a licensed driver, so they do need to heed me as I am trying to teach them safe and appropriate ways to get down the road. ☺
Robinson offers a list of ways that the parent can stay in the drivers seat, including classic recommendations such as "be aware of your child's manipulations and never give in," "be consistent," and "give children freedoms in direct proportion to their appropriate behavior." I used to think that these things made a lot of sense, but as illustrated in past (and future) parenting posts here, some of my perspectives have shifted.
I do agree with the author on the following points:

• The child should take responsibility for his own actions (don't put blame on yourself or anyone else)
• The child should take responsibility for his own knowledge
• Respond to (correct) your child as necessary, regardless of location, situation, or surrounding people [a personal note: if in public, I think it is important to correct children in a discreet way, but I do think it's best to address problems immediately rather than waiting]
• Make sure the child knows that you love him. Say it, show it, and remind him often.
• Make sure that your words match your actions. Be someone your child can count on [and, I would add, don't utilize manipulative techniques on them either!]

I'm working on a post outlining the most basic premise of my parenting philosophy, which is respect: respect for oneself and for everyone else. Truthfully, if respect is demonstrated and practiced by the parents, it will probably be practiced by the children as well, and it is likely that manipulative behaviors will be sporadic rather than habitual. However every child is different, and I think that some are inclined toward manipulation. Again, it's not a malicious thing on their part, it is simply their effort to get what they want. Since I perceive their wants as being as valid as my own, I'm often willing to give them what they want. I am opposed to denying them just because they ask in an inappropriate way, but I would certainly make efforts to help them find better ways to ask, (and then I would expect them to utilize those methods in the future).

Robinson speaks of punishment methods to use to break manipulative behaviors...while I appreciate that sometimes parents do need to impose consequences, I am not a fan of punishment as such...I agree with him that it is important to always address problematic behavior, I just have different opinions about the best ways to address it. ☺

One very important point Robinson makes is that we as parents need to be careful that our expectations of our children are appropriate. As I've said before, I do believe that children (and adults) tend to live up to what is expected of them, but we do need to have realistic expectations. A third grader cannot do algebra, and a toddler cannot lift the milk jug to pass at the dinner table...on the other hand, a 5 year old can check in before going outside, and a teenager can schedule in advance to borrow the car.

For those parents who are firmly in the "gentle discipline" camp, this book will probably offend you greatly. When I first read it I thought it had a lot of good ideas, but as I said, my philosophy of parenting has shifted since then. I think that this book (like most parenting books I've read) has its good parts; however I've just covered them all for you, so now you don't need to read it yourself. ☺

"Animal Vegetable Miracle" by Barbara Kingsolver

I don't remember when I first heard about this book. I do know that it was not an unfamiliar title last summer when my mother was reading it and told me that she loved it. I made a mental note to get around to reading it sometime...
A month ago I saw it on the rental shelf at our little library (they have a program where they can rent recent or popular books for less than buying them, so there is a decent rotating collection there), so I snatched it up.

I should probably warn you that if you are pregnant and craving fresh fruit and vegetables (especially if you live in a rural corner of Alaska and cannot get them no matter how much you want them), and it's the end of a long winter where none of the produce is very good even if you could get it, and you haven't had your own garden in three years and you miss it terribly...then this book may leave you feeling very very hungry and dreaming about things like farmers markets and hoeing weeds and canning peaches. Of course, I still heartily recommend it.


Animal Vegetable Miracle follows a year in the life of Barbara Kingsolver, her husband, and two teenage daughters. They decided that they wanted to be 'locavores' for a year, as a sortof social experiment. They did make one exception per family member--dad got his coffee (organic and fair trade of course), one daughter got hot chocolate, mom got her spices...but other than that they ate locally. They planted a massive garden, raised their own chickens and turkeys, went to their farmers market religiously, and almost everything they consumed that year was produced within their own county (I think the most distant item came from two states away). The book tells not only their story of learning to eat locally (and in season!), but also includes several essays from Stephen Hopp (her husband, a professor of environmental studies), essays from the elder daughter Camille Kingsolver, and a mouthwatering collection of recipes that follow the 'in season' rule (in other words, nothing calls for mixing produce from one season with produce from another).

Here are a couple of my favorite quotes from the book:

"[O]ur vegetables have come to lack two features of interest: nutrition and flavor. Storage and transport take predictable tolls on the volatile plant compounds that subtly add up to taste and food value. Breeding to increase shelf life also has tended to decrease palatability. Bizarre as it seams, we've accepted a tradeoff that amounts to: 'Give me every vegetable in every season, even if it tastes like a cardboard picture of its former self.' You'd think we cared more about the idea of what we're eating than about what we're eating."

"Each plant part we eat must come in its turn--leaves, buds, flowers, green fruits, ripe fruits, hard fruits--because that is the necessary order of things for an annual plant. For the life of them, they can't do it differently...
"Waiting for [some foods] is harder. It's tempting to reach for melons, red peppers, tomatoes, and other late-summer delights before summer even arrives. But it's actually possible to wait, celebrating each season when it comes, not fretting about its being absent at all other times because something else good is at hand.
"If many of us would view this style of eating as deprevation [only getting foods when they are in season], that's only because we've grown accustomed to the botanically outrageious condition of having everything, always."

"Waiting for foods to come into season means tasting them when they're good, but waiting is also part of most value equasions...It's hard to reduce our modern complex of food choices into unifying principles, but this is one that generally works: eating home-cooked meals from whole, in-season ingredients obtained from the most local source available is eating well, in every sense. Good for the habitat, good for the body...
"That's the sublime paradox of a food culture: restraint equals indulgence."

"It's interesting that penny-pinching is an accepted defense for toxic food habits, when frugality so rarely rules other consumer domains."

I found the book at once riveting, thought-provoking, and inspiring. It's not just about eating organic foods (though Kingsolver clearly feels strongly about that, and explains why); it's not just about eating local foods (though she obviously feels strongly about that too); it's not even wholly about eating in season (although that comes closer to the mark). No, Animal Vegetable Miracle is about mindful eating. About choosing our foods--and preparing them--with conscientiousness and thought.