I meant to blog about this the other day...
On Friday I went to a new salon to get my eyebrows waxed and the waxer was chatty as they are. She asked if I'd had a busy day so far and I was about to reply not really when I decided to actually admit to my busy day. In the scheme of things it really wasn't, but I'd gotten two kids to school, taken two more to the doctors where the youngest one was vaccinated. Taken them home and whilst comforting the baby (really he was fine) I hung out a couple of loads of washing and brought some in, folding putting away etc etc before picking up the two at school and bringing them home, making lunch for all whilst scoffing mine to be able to get eye brows waxed.
I added that I had four children, so was often pretty busy, opening myself up to the usual veiled criticisms I get. But no! She said...how lovely, I really want to have four children! I would have been floored had I not been lying down already. I kind of stuttered about how blessed we are. Then she even commented that our princess was lucky to have three brothers, not the usual, how disappointing! Really made my day :)
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
Slacktivism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism
I didn't know there was a term for it!
I have been quite disturbed by the recent 'replace your profile pic with a cartoon character for child abuse' thing on facebook. Such as this:
I didn't really get the link between cartoons and child abuse and thus posted a question, getting varied responses. It bothered me just as much as the 'put your bra colour as your status update' thing and the 'tell us where you keep your handbag as your status update' thing, all for breast cancer although I also found those meme's insulting as a woman (I'm no girl!). It wasn't the causes themselves, I am no fan of breast cancer or child abuse, I just really don't get how this aids those causes in ANY way.
I've heard the 'it increases awareness' argument and just don't agree. Do people *really* think about the issue? Probably some do, but I suspect the majority copy and paste, have fun funding a pic of their old cartoons and then don't really give it a second thought. And even if they did think about the issue, what is in the information there to give them food for thought? There's no link to give them further information so perhaps they'll be thinking about child abductions and murders, or those horrible cases you see on TV where the children are seriously harmed by their parents. Without going searching for themselves, they won't be able to think about the subtle signs children might exhibit when they are being abused. They won't know what to do about it if they do recognise these signs. It was the same with the two breast cancer campaigns. No link on how to check your breasts, to donate money etc. My point is it. does. nothing. The above wiki link even suggests that this arm chair activism can be harmful..
This is not to say I am not just as guilty. I sign online petitions and then delete the email that follows asking for money. I do donate when I can but can't possibly give money to all the causes I care about. I've joined facebook causes groups that probably do nothing. My hope from groups such as anti circumcision groups is the awareness thing but I guess people who are going to mutilate their baby boys would just eye roll at that too. I would probably still argue that the people on the fence might read more into it but I really don't know.I guess I could do more but I still donate hours a week to volunteering as it is, not sure I have much more to give!
So, what's the point? Well those status things annoy me :P Bigtime. It got me thinking about all these types of time wasting things. There are so many things going on in our world that just get ignored. I briefly saw hundreds of people were killed yesterday in Columbia (I think, I'm not even sure, it didn't make headlines), an Australian citizen is about to be arrested via interpol, supposedly charged with having consensual sex without a condom. Seriously. Yet our media reports it as sexual assault and molestation and very few are batting eyelids. Nothing to do at all with him running an organisation embarrassing world governments of course. Why do so few people care? Could it be because they're too busy pasting cartoon characters to their facebook profiles? I know that's waaay oversimplifying matters, but it's happening all the time. Increasing awareness (well not really) while completely blissfully unaware ourselves. While I was going on and on about this to Mark the other night, it struck me as very similar to his favourite quote
Just want to point out...I don't really know enough or have an opinion of wikileaks or the chap running it, I am quite troubled though by this arrest thing!
I didn't know there was a term for it!
I have been quite disturbed by the recent 'replace your profile pic with a cartoon character for child abuse' thing on facebook. Such as this:
Change your facebook profile picture to a cartoon character from your childhood and invite your friends to do the same. Until monday (Dec. 6) there should be no human faces on facebook, but an invasion of memories..(FOR THE FIGHT AGAINST CHILD VIOLENCE!)
I didn't really get the link between cartoons and child abuse and thus posted a question, getting varied responses. It bothered me just as much as the 'put your bra colour as your status update' thing and the 'tell us where you keep your handbag as your status update' thing, all for breast cancer although I also found those meme's insulting as a woman (I'm no girl!). It wasn't the causes themselves, I am no fan of breast cancer or child abuse, I just really don't get how this aids those causes in ANY way.
I've heard the 'it increases awareness' argument and just don't agree. Do people *really* think about the issue? Probably some do, but I suspect the majority copy and paste, have fun funding a pic of their old cartoons and then don't really give it a second thought. And even if they did think about the issue, what is in the information there to give them food for thought? There's no link to give them further information so perhaps they'll be thinking about child abductions and murders, or those horrible cases you see on TV where the children are seriously harmed by their parents. Without going searching for themselves, they won't be able to think about the subtle signs children might exhibit when they are being abused. They won't know what to do about it if they do recognise these signs. It was the same with the two breast cancer campaigns. No link on how to check your breasts, to donate money etc. My point is it. does. nothing. The above wiki link even suggests that this arm chair activism can be harmful..
The acts also tend to dilute awareness campaignsInteresting...so people think their at least increasing awareness but perhaps everyone just become more immune to the message? I know I usually just roll my eyes when I see the ones that proclaim '97% of people won't post this message, will you be one of the 3% that do?'. I don't even read the message. I'm sure the people who start these messages mean well, but I think they are wasting their time.
This is not to say I am not just as guilty. I sign online petitions and then delete the email that follows asking for money. I do donate when I can but can't possibly give money to all the causes I care about. I've joined facebook causes groups that probably do nothing. My hope from groups such as anti circumcision groups is the awareness thing but I guess people who are going to mutilate their baby boys would just eye roll at that too. I would probably still argue that the people on the fence might read more into it but I really don't know.I guess I could do more but I still donate hours a week to volunteering as it is, not sure I have much more to give!
So, what's the point? Well those status things annoy me :P Bigtime. It got me thinking about all these types of time wasting things. There are so many things going on in our world that just get ignored. I briefly saw hundreds of people were killed yesterday in Columbia (I think, I'm not even sure, it didn't make headlines), an Australian citizen is about to be arrested via interpol, supposedly charged with having consensual sex without a condom. Seriously. Yet our media reports it as sexual assault and molestation and very few are batting eyelids. Nothing to do at all with him running an organisation embarrassing world governments of course. Why do so few people care? Could it be because they're too busy pasting cartoon characters to their facebook profiles? I know that's waaay oversimplifying matters, but it's happening all the time. Increasing awareness (well not really) while completely blissfully unaware ourselves. While I was going on and on about this to Mark the other night, it struck me as very similar to his favourite quote
Religion is the opiate of the peopleBy Karl Marx. Maybe a modern version of that would be social networking fluff? I'm sure it still rings true with fundamentalist religious types but maybe that what the rest of us are doing? I'm no conspiracy theorist, I don't think this is the work of the 'new world order' or anything :P Maybe just human nature to find some way of sticking our heads in the sand....
Just want to point out...I don't really know enough or have an opinion of wikileaks or the chap running it, I am quite troubled though by this arrest thing!
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Breast sharing...
With the increasing popularity of eats on feets I really love that breast milk is being recognised as the normal milk. I think that it will help our society to see that breast milk and artificial baby milk are NOT equal, not just another option that doesn't really matter. Feeding a baby with anything but breast milk is a risk, something I don't think is recognised. These risks are well publicised, increased risk or auto immune disease (type 1 diabetes, eczema, asthma, etc), childhood cancers, obesity etc etc. Yet when they are reported in the media, they change it to 'benefits of breast feeding' which kind of makes it an unattainable ideal. It tells women that breast feeding is the best and as we know, in life, few achieve the best. It's supposed to reassure women who have 'failed' to that their best was good enough but I suspect for those in that boat, it probably does the opposite. The fact is, women don't fail. They are failed. Again and again. The doctor tells them not to worry, formula is fine. He could have just told her that lots of women feel their supply is poor, or that lots of women struggle with x,y,z and here is some tips to get through it. Or if they don't know, here is the number for someone who does. They are treated like fools in hospital both when birthing their babies and postnatally. The support they are given fails them and their babies.
So, where am I going with this? I find it heart warming that breast milk is getting some publicity. Lots of people were probably horrified at first but hopefully it'll get them thinking. Hopefully they'll look into the risks of artificial baby milk rather than assume it's just another feeding option. My biggest hope is that it'll filter to health professionals and that they'll look to support women rather than looking for short term solutions to what is likely to not be a huge problem in the first place!
Anyway, I have digressed bigtime.
This came up this afternoon in my online mother's group with Felix. People were quite respectful about it rather then the 'ewwwww' that often is the first response. I have been quite surprised by my own response to the idea of cross feeding.
Intellectually, I think it is the best solution to the problem of lack of breast milk for any baby that can tolerate it. I'd suspect the risk of infection or other risks of cross nursing would be outweighed by the risk of them not receiving breast milk, nevermind the risks of contaminated formula or any other issues that come with the preparation of the milk. In the circumstances where a mother cannot feed her own baby, the comfort a baby would get from a breast, even if not the one that it belongs to, makes it an easy decision for me.
But there it is. A baby receives so much more from breast feeding than just milk. It's an intimate act, one that cannot be compared to bottle feeding. Of course, not every feed is that 'gazing into each other's eyes' kind of feed but lots of them are. There is lots of skin to skin contact, well certainly more than there is with bottle feeding. This is what I struggle with. In the scenario where I am unable or unavailable to feed my baby I am more than happy to have another woman, preferably someone I know and trust, feed my baby from her own breast. It's something I've discussed with Mark, what would he do if I was seriously ill, hurt or dead and we had a young baby. I'm very pleased to report that he said he would call any lactating friend of mine he could to get milk in the short term and get their help and advice in the long term. Where my heart interferes with all this is in more casual arrangements.
The new Harry Potter movie came out a few weeks ago. I *really* want to go see it. I don't really want to take a squirmy 5 month old with a short attention span, both for my benefit and the benefit of the others in the cinema. Said 5 month old thinks bottles are for fools. We're tried a few times, both with bottles and with cup feeding and he is not impressed. A good friend who I trust entirely offered to look after baby Foo so I could go with Mark. This same friend gave my milk to her newborn over a year ago now, but from a bottle or cup, not from my breast. At first thought, this seemed like the perfect solution but then I thought about Foo making those goo goo eyes at someone else and I felt that insane jealousy rise up. Where on earth did that come from?! I've spent a week or so thinking about this and in the end I've realised that it just feels a bit wrong for a movie. The planning it thing seems wrong too. I know that if I left him with her or any other lactating human I trusted and for whatever reason I was delayed and baby was distressed I wouldn't hesitate to say 'feed him!!'
It's been interesting for this to come up. I read about a women and her friend who share feeding their toddlers to the point that the child will chose the other mum to feed with her friend. My first thought was, imagine my toddler rejecting me for another! Clearly I have issues there, lol!
Guess I'm waiting for the DVD release ;)
So, where am I going with this? I find it heart warming that breast milk is getting some publicity. Lots of people were probably horrified at first but hopefully it'll get them thinking. Hopefully they'll look into the risks of artificial baby milk rather than assume it's just another feeding option. My biggest hope is that it'll filter to health professionals and that they'll look to support women rather than looking for short term solutions to what is likely to not be a huge problem in the first place!
Anyway, I have digressed bigtime.
This came up this afternoon in my online mother's group with Felix. People were quite respectful about it rather then the 'ewwwww' that often is the first response. I have been quite surprised by my own response to the idea of cross feeding.
Intellectually, I think it is the best solution to the problem of lack of breast milk for any baby that can tolerate it. I'd suspect the risk of infection or other risks of cross nursing would be outweighed by the risk of them not receiving breast milk, nevermind the risks of contaminated formula or any other issues that come with the preparation of the milk. In the circumstances where a mother cannot feed her own baby, the comfort a baby would get from a breast, even if not the one that it belongs to, makes it an easy decision for me.
But there it is. A baby receives so much more from breast feeding than just milk. It's an intimate act, one that cannot be compared to bottle feeding. Of course, not every feed is that 'gazing into each other's eyes' kind of feed but lots of them are. There is lots of skin to skin contact, well certainly more than there is with bottle feeding. This is what I struggle with. In the scenario where I am unable or unavailable to feed my baby I am more than happy to have another woman, preferably someone I know and trust, feed my baby from her own breast. It's something I've discussed with Mark, what would he do if I was seriously ill, hurt or dead and we had a young baby. I'm very pleased to report that he said he would call any lactating friend of mine he could to get milk in the short term and get their help and advice in the long term. Where my heart interferes with all this is in more casual arrangements.
The new Harry Potter movie came out a few weeks ago. I *really* want to go see it. I don't really want to take a squirmy 5 month old with a short attention span, both for my benefit and the benefit of the others in the cinema. Said 5 month old thinks bottles are for fools. We're tried a few times, both with bottles and with cup feeding and he is not impressed. A good friend who I trust entirely offered to look after baby Foo so I could go with Mark. This same friend gave my milk to her newborn over a year ago now, but from a bottle or cup, not from my breast. At first thought, this seemed like the perfect solution but then I thought about Foo making those goo goo eyes at someone else and I felt that insane jealousy rise up. Where on earth did that come from?! I've spent a week or so thinking about this and in the end I've realised that it just feels a bit wrong for a movie. The planning it thing seems wrong too. I know that if I left him with her or any other lactating human I trusted and for whatever reason I was delayed and baby was distressed I wouldn't hesitate to say 'feed him!!'
It's been interesting for this to come up. I read about a women and her friend who share feeding their toddlers to the point that the child will chose the other mum to feed with her friend. My first thought was, imagine my toddler rejecting me for another! Clearly I have issues there, lol!
Guess I'm waiting for the DVD release ;)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)