My brain is exhausted, so, here's a question for you that has had a definitive 'yes!' answer in our house over the past 4 weeks.
Three year olds are more difficult than two year olds.
Discuss?
Thursday, 22 July 2010
Tuesday, 25 May 2010
School days
Recent conversations have brought my time at school to mind a lot recently, coincided with thoughts about how my daughter relates to other children, and how that might affect her in the future.
And, ya know what? Like many, I had a crap time as a teenager due to various factors, but I don't harbour pain or anger at school, or the people I knew there.
A recent post at Feministe outlines how difficult it can be for people who are 'different' to get on in school. I guess things are a little different here, compared to in American schools where such a strict 'class' system is enforced (which I only really know about from TV and film, so, Americans, you can enlighten me if I'm wrong!)
I know I went through many phases of trying to 'fit in' with people, but, in the long run, I was, and always will be, somewhat of a solitary individual. For better or worse, I remember enjoying my own company and spending most of my time figuring out my own thoughts, rather than caring about what other people thought of 'my image' or my interests.
The comments over at Feministe made me think about what I'm teaching my daughter, and what I was taught as a child. I don't really recall any sit-down, pre-emptive talks about 'just be yourself.' Maybe they occurred, but they don't stand out. (Mum, dad, help me here?)
What I do recall, however, are my parents supporting me through every time I felt bad, or needed to let loose and scream, or just to talk about anything and everything.
So I guess my advice to other parents, and to myself, is to always talk to children. ALWAYS make them feel that they have valid opinions and you are interested in what they have to say. Never put them down or tell them they're being stupid. Sure, prepare them for the world, but the main thing is to deal with what's in front of you, how they feel, not stress over every single interaction they might possibly have in their lives.
I think about how I'm going to deal with the messages about gender NP will receive every day of her life, and realise that the only way to teach her is to challenge her: why does she think that's a good idea? Why does it matter what other people think? And listen to what she has to say. She's not even 3 yet, and I feel like I'm barely out of childhood myself, I just hope I've got enough wit and experience to help her through her own challenges.
And, ya know what? Like many, I had a crap time as a teenager due to various factors, but I don't harbour pain or anger at school, or the people I knew there.
A recent post at Feministe outlines how difficult it can be for people who are 'different' to get on in school. I guess things are a little different here, compared to in American schools where such a strict 'class' system is enforced (which I only really know about from TV and film, so, Americans, you can enlighten me if I'm wrong!)
I know I went through many phases of trying to 'fit in' with people, but, in the long run, I was, and always will be, somewhat of a solitary individual. For better or worse, I remember enjoying my own company and spending most of my time figuring out my own thoughts, rather than caring about what other people thought of 'my image' or my interests.
The comments over at Feministe made me think about what I'm teaching my daughter, and what I was taught as a child. I don't really recall any sit-down, pre-emptive talks about 'just be yourself.' Maybe they occurred, but they don't stand out. (Mum, dad, help me here?)
What I do recall, however, are my parents supporting me through every time I felt bad, or needed to let loose and scream, or just to talk about anything and everything.
So I guess my advice to other parents, and to myself, is to always talk to children. ALWAYS make them feel that they have valid opinions and you are interested in what they have to say. Never put them down or tell them they're being stupid. Sure, prepare them for the world, but the main thing is to deal with what's in front of you, how they feel, not stress over every single interaction they might possibly have in their lives.
I think about how I'm going to deal with the messages about gender NP will receive every day of her life, and realise that the only way to teach her is to challenge her: why does she think that's a good idea? Why does it matter what other people think? And listen to what she has to say. She's not even 3 yet, and I feel like I'm barely out of childhood myself, I just hope I've got enough wit and experience to help her through her own challenges.
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
On child hating
Well, I kinda missed most of the crazy child-hating conversations going on around the blogsphere, but a good review with some excellent links can be found over at Blue Milk
Reading BM's post made me think about how we've raised NP, her own behaviour in public, and how we contribute to the over-arching problem.
We've always eaten out with our daughter, though there are definitely times I remember regretting it. She was about 2 months old and breastfeeding and my parents booked a big family meal in the evening. As I remember it, we spent the whole evening walking around outside, taking it in turns to wolf down our (relatively pricey) meals, then leave early because she just wasn't up to it. From that moment on we always insisted that family make plans that fit around her.
I guess we caved in to the rest of the world and made our child fit into society: we never took her on a plane, never took her out to eat late at night etc. However, we did take her out regularly during the day, coffee shops, restaurants, etc. These days, her behaviour is usually impeccable for a (nearly) 3 year old, so much so that people comment on it. At which point I feel proud, but also very embarrassed because it feels as though we're contributing to the attitudes that children should be 'seen and not heard.' Sometimes, I feel as though the one example of a kid behaving in an 'adult appropriate' manner makes it difficult for parents of more adventurous children to be accepted by society!
Mr Onions often refers to it being a case of our ability to 'control our child', (even though I really do hate that phrase and the implications of it) but I'm not so sure that is the case, I really do think it's her personality. However, I sometimes question whether we've done the right thing for our daughter. Has she be stunted or held back by our methods? Have we discouraged her from behaving in an age appropriate manner? She is definitely reserved when it comes to interacting with other people and children. She has very strict boundaries that make it difficult for affectionate people to be around her. However, I remember her being a baby and saying the same thing - she would never jump straight in to play with toys, she would always suss out the situation before choosing her course of action. She would never instantly smile at people, she had to figure them out first. It's not like she's unhappy - she is a lovely, excitable, intelligent girl. She's just different. (Like every other single kid in the world).
I can't say she's never tantrum-ed in public, or that I haven't been embarrassed by her behaviour, but I also can't say I've ever really had the 'evil eye' from anyone. Maybe it's where I live, maybe it's me, maybe it's her. Maybe we shouldn't try to pigeon-hole all kids into 'good' and 'bad' behaviour - just make it 'being an individual, still figuring it all out'. The way we guide our kids is always going to differ, but that doesn't mean one way is wrong and another way is right - that's just another way of forcing mothers into competition with each other: another form of control in a sexist society. After all, infighting is the best way to keep people oppressed.
I guess this is really me just working out my own insecurities about my parenting. I always felt I'd done the right thing, but more and more you wonder whether your approach really was the best thing for your child. We're so het up these days about 'doing it right' that we'll probably end up creating a generation of neurotics.
Reading BM's post made me think about how we've raised NP, her own behaviour in public, and how we contribute to the over-arching problem.
We've always eaten out with our daughter, though there are definitely times I remember regretting it. She was about 2 months old and breastfeeding and my parents booked a big family meal in the evening. As I remember it, we spent the whole evening walking around outside, taking it in turns to wolf down our (relatively pricey) meals, then leave early because she just wasn't up to it. From that moment on we always insisted that family make plans that fit around her.
I guess we caved in to the rest of the world and made our child fit into society: we never took her on a plane, never took her out to eat late at night etc. However, we did take her out regularly during the day, coffee shops, restaurants, etc. These days, her behaviour is usually impeccable for a (nearly) 3 year old, so much so that people comment on it. At which point I feel proud, but also very embarrassed because it feels as though we're contributing to the attitudes that children should be 'seen and not heard.' Sometimes, I feel as though the one example of a kid behaving in an 'adult appropriate' manner makes it difficult for parents of more adventurous children to be accepted by society!
Mr Onions often refers to it being a case of our ability to 'control our child', (even though I really do hate that phrase and the implications of it) but I'm not so sure that is the case, I really do think it's her personality. However, I sometimes question whether we've done the right thing for our daughter. Has she be stunted or held back by our methods? Have we discouraged her from behaving in an age appropriate manner? She is definitely reserved when it comes to interacting with other people and children. She has very strict boundaries that make it difficult for affectionate people to be around her. However, I remember her being a baby and saying the same thing - she would never jump straight in to play with toys, she would always suss out the situation before choosing her course of action. She would never instantly smile at people, she had to figure them out first. It's not like she's unhappy - she is a lovely, excitable, intelligent girl. She's just different. (Like every other single kid in the world).
I can't say she's never tantrum-ed in public, or that I haven't been embarrassed by her behaviour, but I also can't say I've ever really had the 'evil eye' from anyone. Maybe it's where I live, maybe it's me, maybe it's her. Maybe we shouldn't try to pigeon-hole all kids into 'good' and 'bad' behaviour - just make it 'being an individual, still figuring it all out'. The way we guide our kids is always going to differ, but that doesn't mean one way is wrong and another way is right - that's just another way of forcing mothers into competition with each other: another form of control in a sexist society. After all, infighting is the best way to keep people oppressed.
I guess this is really me just working out my own insecurities about my parenting. I always felt I'd done the right thing, but more and more you wonder whether your approach really was the best thing for your child. We're so het up these days about 'doing it right' that we'll probably end up creating a generation of neurotics.
Sunday, 16 May 2010
Sexualisation of children
Fertile Feminism hits it right on the head with this post about what is particularly wrong about 'sexualising' children: it's the standard that is set in the first place that is the problem.
The hypocrite in the room
The hypocrite in the room
Friday, 23 April 2010
Mini Book Review: Skullduggery Pleasant
In my quest for books to study I've been consuming a large amount of kids lit lately. Finally, I repeat, FINALLY, I found a book worth talking about.
Skullduggery Pleasant is about the eponymous dead detective and his (young, female) side-kick. And, whilst the female character is only supposed to be 12, the writing is mature and witty, something that I've found lacking in a number of other novels I've read lately. It's almost as if some writers think that language and comedy have to be dumbed down if a book is aimed at pre-teens. Not so for Derek Landy - his characters are truly brought to life through their thoroughly entertaining banter.
Stephanie, the young girl, has a boring life until Mr S.P. turns up, plunging her into a world full of magic and danger that she never knew existed, (you know this story, right?). Stephanie has few skills in the magic world, yet is determined to learn and develop her own abilities. She is served through most of the book by her stubbornness and ability to learn fast, but that's not to say that she doesn't need saving by her mentor on numerous occasions.
(Which is perfectly valid really, seeing as she's only 12 and has never fought freaky monsters before.)
S.P. as a character is witty, fun and mysterious, always allowing Stephanie to come along and do her part, but protecting her in the most dangerous situations. This might all seem a bit patriarchal, but surely a completely patriarchal S.P. would make Stephanie stay at home, out of harms way, not expose her to the risks of his unorthodox methods of detective work. Which would make a thoroughly boring story really, wouldn't it? There needs to be a balance between letting the female character have her own agency and giving a young, inexperienced character the chance to develop (and just being instantly awesome isn't very plausible or interesting, is it?)
Furthermore, Stephanie also has a corresponding female character to look up to, in the form of a mercenary assassin called Tanith. Strong, skilled and respected, Tanith bonds with Stephanie and also fights to protect her.
It's interesting to note that the jacket of the book has only a picture of Skullduggary Pleasant, no other characters. The blurb doesn't really emphasise the female protagonist. This is a book aimed at the widest audience it can possibly get. It is also blatantly the start of a series, where Stephanie is going to grow and develop (hopefully) into a powerful mage.
I see this as a fantastic start, the characters of Tanith and Stephanie are begging to be filled out and developed into kick-ass, awesome women and S.P. is fabulous comic relief and an all around bad-ass. The dialogue is mature and fun and the story line is gripping. I need more.
Skullduggery Pleasant is about the eponymous dead detective and his (young, female) side-kick. And, whilst the female character is only supposed to be 12, the writing is mature and witty, something that I've found lacking in a number of other novels I've read lately. It's almost as if some writers think that language and comedy have to be dumbed down if a book is aimed at pre-teens. Not so for Derek Landy - his characters are truly brought to life through their thoroughly entertaining banter.
Stephanie, the young girl, has a boring life until Mr S.P. turns up, plunging her into a world full of magic and danger that she never knew existed, (you know this story, right?). Stephanie has few skills in the magic world, yet is determined to learn and develop her own abilities. She is served through most of the book by her stubbornness and ability to learn fast, but that's not to say that she doesn't need saving by her mentor on numerous occasions.
(Which is perfectly valid really, seeing as she's only 12 and has never fought freaky monsters before.)
S.P. as a character is witty, fun and mysterious, always allowing Stephanie to come along and do her part, but protecting her in the most dangerous situations. This might all seem a bit patriarchal, but surely a completely patriarchal S.P. would make Stephanie stay at home, out of harms way, not expose her to the risks of his unorthodox methods of detective work. Which would make a thoroughly boring story really, wouldn't it? There needs to be a balance between letting the female character have her own agency and giving a young, inexperienced character the chance to develop (and just being instantly awesome isn't very plausible or interesting, is it?)
Furthermore, Stephanie also has a corresponding female character to look up to, in the form of a mercenary assassin called Tanith. Strong, skilled and respected, Tanith bonds with Stephanie and also fights to protect her.
It's interesting to note that the jacket of the book has only a picture of Skullduggary Pleasant, no other characters. The blurb doesn't really emphasise the female protagonist. This is a book aimed at the widest audience it can possibly get. It is also blatantly the start of a series, where Stephanie is going to grow and develop (hopefully) into a powerful mage.
I see this as a fantastic start, the characters of Tanith and Stephanie are begging to be filled out and developed into kick-ass, awesome women and S.P. is fabulous comic relief and an all around bad-ass. The dialogue is mature and fun and the story line is gripping. I need more.
Thursday, 22 April 2010
TNA Knockout Women become Divas afterall
OK, so, we all have guilty pleasures, don't we?
This one has been one of mine for a while now. Though since the recent changes I'm starting to feel cheated.
When I started watching, there were female wrestlers such as Awesome Kong and ODB, who seemed talented, physical and SUBVERSIVE. There was an ironic group called 'The Beautiful People' who seemed to be taking a swipe at those 'other' female wrestlers, and I loved the joke.
Now though, the joke has turned reality. The 'joke' group now have mud wrestling sessions, strip poker games and (seemingly) the most airtime of any of the female wrestlers. One of them challeged a former member to a 'leather and lace' match. You can imagine what that involves, I'm sure.
The worst part, for me, however, was the 'locked box' match between 8 wrestlers a few weeks ago. The concept was 8 women wrestling for 4 mystery keys to boxes containing: an open contract for any match, a pet spider, the women's title belt, and.... a striptease.
Yes, the person getting the unlucky key would have to strip in the middle of the ring.
Surprise, surprise, the 'winner' of the striptease was the crazy gothic Daffney who didn't seem best pleased, but went on to start an ironic striptease in the ring, only to be interrupted by one of 'The Beautiful People' running on and stripping off herself. Obviously, the Beautiful Person was tall, blonde and busty.
Question: what would have been wrong with Daffney challenging the box results, beating the s**t out of everyone there, then going to smack Hulk Hogan in the head for letting such blatant sexist bulls**t invade something that was actually becoming good and progressive? No, they had to bring on a blonde bimbo character to further their sh***y quest for the penis vote.
I suppose it's too much to ask for a feminist wrestler?
But, the ratings speak for themselves: the locked box results was the most viewed part of the show. So it looks like we're in for more sell-out sexist bulls**t from TNA, all in the quest of ratings over skill.
This one has been one of mine for a while now. Though since the recent changes I'm starting to feel cheated.
When I started watching, there were female wrestlers such as Awesome Kong and ODB, who seemed talented, physical and SUBVERSIVE. There was an ironic group called 'The Beautiful People' who seemed to be taking a swipe at those 'other' female wrestlers, and I loved the joke.
Now though, the joke has turned reality. The 'joke' group now have mud wrestling sessions, strip poker games and (seemingly) the most airtime of any of the female wrestlers. One of them challeged a former member to a 'leather and lace' match. You can imagine what that involves, I'm sure.
The worst part, for me, however, was the 'locked box' match between 8 wrestlers a few weeks ago. The concept was 8 women wrestling for 4 mystery keys to boxes containing: an open contract for any match, a pet spider, the women's title belt, and.... a striptease.
Yes, the person getting the unlucky key would have to strip in the middle of the ring.
Surprise, surprise, the 'winner' of the striptease was the crazy gothic Daffney who didn't seem best pleased, but went on to start an ironic striptease in the ring, only to be interrupted by one of 'The Beautiful People' running on and stripping off herself. Obviously, the Beautiful Person was tall, blonde and busty.
Question: what would have been wrong with Daffney challenging the box results, beating the s**t out of everyone there, then going to smack Hulk Hogan in the head for letting such blatant sexist bulls**t invade something that was actually becoming good and progressive? No, they had to bring on a blonde bimbo character to further their sh***y quest for the penis vote.
I suppose it's too much to ask for a feminist wrestler?
But, the ratings speak for themselves: the locked box results was the most viewed part of the show. So it looks like we're in for more sell-out sexist bulls**t from TNA, all in the quest of ratings over skill.
Monday, 12 April 2010
Fictional role models for young girls?
So, I have been looking for potential books for my next dissertation for about 2 weeks, and today I spent a good 30 minutes in a high street books retailer looking for children's/young adult novels with female protagonists.
(Yes, I know it's cheaper to buy from Amazon, but I need to LOOK at the books, read inside, get a feel for the writing style, not just browse through a bunch of crap about what other people think of them. And it's 3 for 2 in High Street Books Retailer).
Anyway, wow. The display was bestselling and new books. I searched up and down, looking for stories about strong girls. Failing that, I then searched for stories that weren't about vampires. Then for the remaining stories that had female protagonists...
It was a disheartening sight. Sure, Sabriel was in there. But I needed a book that was published more recently. Books that looked promising turned out to have starring roles for boys. Books that had female main characters were, invariably, pink. With pictures of make up.
Sometimes it really seems the mainstream is so obsessed with getting boys to read that the ONLY adventure books worth publishing NEED to have male protagonists.
I have a meeting with my proposed supervisor at University for my masters this week, and I have little-to-nothing to take to her in the way of recently published empowered female characters. Who would have thought it could be so difficult to find?
So I'm throwing it out to the internetz: anyone, please, throw me the names of some books for age 11+, published between 2008 and 2010 that have one or more of the following conditions:
(Yes, I know it's cheaper to buy from Amazon, but I need to LOOK at the books, read inside, get a feel for the writing style, not just browse through a bunch of crap about what other people think of them. And it's 3 for 2 in High Street Books Retailer).
Anyway, wow. The display was bestselling and new books. I searched up and down, looking for stories about strong girls. Failing that, I then searched for stories that weren't about vampires. Then for the remaining stories that had female protagonists...
It was a disheartening sight. Sure, Sabriel was in there. But I needed a book that was published more recently. Books that looked promising turned out to have starring roles for boys. Books that had female main characters were, invariably, pink. With pictures of make up.
Sometimes it really seems the mainstream is so obsessed with getting boys to read that the ONLY adventure books worth publishing NEED to have male protagonists.
I have a meeting with my proposed supervisor at University for my masters this week, and I have little-to-nothing to take to her in the way of recently published empowered female characters. Who would have thought it could be so difficult to find?
So I'm throwing it out to the internetz: anyone, please, throw me the names of some books for age 11+, published between 2008 and 2010 that have one or more of the following conditions:
- female protagonist
- going on a quest/journey of discovery
- preferably fantasy
- NO VAMPIRE ROMANCES
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
