The Daily Dance

I just came across Motherlode, the NY Times' parenting blog written by Lisa Belkin.

Yesterday, the topic was "How a Parent Gets Through the Day". It quoted from an article in the Times that day about Tim and Megan and how they manage child care, two full-time jobs and their marriage. At the end of her post, Lisa asked commenters to describe their own "dance". What followed was a very interesting portrait of what it's like to balance raising kids with paid work in America today, 161 examples in all.

Most of the discussion was respectful, although there were a few individuals who brought up, "You should only have kids if you can afford them.", an argument that doesn't make sense, because it says that only rich people should procreate, from people living in what is the best example of a meritocracy that you will find in the world.

Since my husband went back to work full-time in January, we've developed our own routine and so far it's working pretty well. We both get up around 6am, Murray goes downstairs to get our breakfast ready while I get myself ready. If Gavin is awake, Murray will feed him breakfast too. I'll come downstairs, get Gavin's bag for daycare ready and pack our lunches, quickly eat breakfast then get Gavin dressed so we can all be out the door by 7:30. I drop Gavin off at daycare and then catch the train to work. I can usually get to the office by 8:20. Murray picks Gavin up around 5 and makes supper and waits for me to get home, usually around 6:30. I'll play with Gavin and give him his bath (if it's bath night) and every night I get him ready for bed and read him stories before he goes to sleep. We try to spend most of the weekend together.

I'm fortunate because Murray's job allows him to get home before me, because our daycare provider is understanding if we're late picking him up (which can happen if the roads are bad, but we try), and because I have a husband who takes on more than his fair share of the household duties so I can work. It's not for everybody, but it works for us (so far).

I don't subscribe to the philosophy that the only possible way children will end up to be productive members of society is for at least one parent to be with the child as much as possible. Am I suggesting that parents should just drop the kids off with the nanny and be done with it? Not at all; they're children, not accessories. But I think that as long as children know that they are loved, they'll turn out okay. Right?

Cool v. Regular

I love Amy Poehler and Tina Fey. They're both smart, confident, funny, successful women, but what I like most is how down-to-earth they both seem. Not really caught up in the whole "Hollywood" thing. I'm kind of embarrassed about how much I want them to like me.

To illustrate why I think so highly of them (both working moms I might add), here is a quote from an interview Amy did recently in The Advocate (and to those who might not know, no she's not gay - married to a Canadian actor, Will Arnett - but she's almost just as fabulous). Anyway, the interviewer asked whether she'd rather be a cool mom or a regular mom, and Amy replied:

I’m going to be a regular mom. The cool mom thing can really backfire. I’m out working in Los Angeles right now, and it’s filled with cool moms with tight figures in jumpsuits, but when they turn around they have the face of a 70-year-old. It’s very disconcerting. I’m probably jinxing myself, but I like children to have nice manners and a lot of boundaries. My hope for my children is that they’re happy, and my hope for myself is that people want to be around my children.

Like I said. Love. Her.

Let's Find Something Real to Argue About

As many of you may know, Afghan President Hamid Karzai recently signed a law that took women's rights in his country back to the days of the Taliban. People around the world are outraged, especially those countries who have been an integral part of the war in Afghanistan. After all, if this is what the "friendly" government is going to do, then what exactly are we fighting for?

This past Friday, Naomi Lakritz had a great column in the Calgary Herald on the subject. She commented on the huge disconnect between women's rights in the first and third world, and how what we call an injustice pales in comparison to what millions of women around the world have to go through on a daily basis. We don't have to worry about being able to go to school, we can leave the house without a man's permission, we can marry who we want to, we don't have to worry about being killed for being raped. The list goes on and on.

So I found it particularly ironic that the same day Ms. Lakritz's column ran, that one of the big news stories of the day here in Calgary was about women being asked to leave City pools to breastfeed. I don't mean that they were asked to leave the pool facility, no, they were asked to stop breastfeeding their baby while they were actually in the pool. They admit that they were told that they could breastfeed on the deck, but apparently that's not good enough.

I don't know what I found more upsetting, the fact that these women are being so ignorant or the fact that the City just rolled over and was all apologetic, "Oh no, they can breastfeed wherever they like". Being asked to leave the pool and sit on the deck to breastfeed is not an injustice. If you think that it's an injustice, then you obviously need to get a life.

I think what some people forget is that living in a tolerant, accepting society, doesn't mean that everyone is allowed to do whatever they want all of the time. There are limits. As one lifeguard said, "No one is allowed to eat in the pool." So take your baby, sit on the deck and while he's eating, think about how you might use some of your time to help women who really need it.