"She's going to be in my family one day"

I was invited to the preschool Teddy Bears Picnic last week. It was pretty likely I'd be standing around for an hour, not speaking to any other parents and appearing to be a stuck up cow (my mom calls it 'aloof'), but for the sake of watching Miss J's face when introduced to Pink Bill Murray, I attended. 

Little NP was ecstatic to have me there and made a beautiful jam sandwich for us to share, with lettuce and teddy bear ham on the side (NP's philosophy: why make a choice when you can have both?)

I wasn't wrong: the hour was spent with everyone paired up with other parents they already knew, barely acknowledging anyone else. I played with the kids then had a nice sit in the sun. NP grabbed a bike and was soon joined by a little boy from the next-door (mostly evil) nursery. They sped around the playground track together for the best part of 10 minutes, talking, racing, waiting for each other to catch up. It was gorgeous. 

They came over to see me.

Little Boy: "This is my friend"

Me: "Oh right, this is my little girl, I'm her mommy"

LB: "She's going to be in my family one day"

Me: "Is she? Well that's nice, are you going to get married"

LB & NP: "Yes"

Me: "Are you having a nice ride on your bikes?"

LB: "Yes these are both Mini's and they have a V8 N"*

both speed off happily

Me: "Oh OK then"

must attempt to ingratiate more into acceptable parental society to get these two together more often. 

*This is what it sounded like to me, god knows what the last bit was meant to be, but I found it pretty damn funny

Counterbalance

I believe our life is a process of juggling to preserve a fine balance; thus to reset the equilibrium that was thrown off by our super smug home educating post on Monday, the universe has thrown us a glorious cold that has left the rest of the week looking mostly like this:

This, I suppose, is actually another benefit of HE: little lady gets to spend her poorly time concentrating on getting better and doing the little things she enjoys (like Lego - which also doubles up as an educational tool for fine motor skills, following instructions, translating 2D pictures into 3D reality, shapes, number recognition etc. etc.) and neither of us have to worry about 'missing' anything.

(well, apart from being confined to the house with a child that can't even walk down the stairs)

Writing and Phonics

As an aside to our tale from yesterday, I thought I'd chat about the Phonics workbook we were doing, and the Playful Parenting technique that, I felt, gave us a massive breakthrough in working together.

I know, it sounds hideously boring, but I managed to demonstrate to myself that Playful Parenting really *does* work better than having a conversation, sometimes. I'm in no way connected to the author of the book, I simply had it recommended to me and found it at a good price on Kindle.

The premise of Playful Parenting is joining the child in her world, instead of forcing her into the parental world of 'Do As You're Told.'

For example:

NP has become very anxious about 'doing writing.' I blame the school nursery entirely for this because they regularly forced the kids to write their names, making NP do it against her will by holding the pencil with her, so that they could assess her. After this, she was unhappy about writing unless someone was helping her in this way. I also think she has performance anxiety about getting it perfect (which is probably inherited from us freaks ;)

Yesterday she dearly wanted to have a go at the workbook, she flicked through and found the pages she wanted to do (as I bit my control-freak tongue about working through the pages in order) and found the letter 'M', which we haven't officially 'done' yet (in terms of listening to the songs etc, we have, however, been writing 'Mommy' quite regularly).

We chatted about the page and NP had a go at a capital M. Then she told me I had to do the rest. I wasn't about to start filling in the book for her, how would she learn anything from that?

I decided that the situation here was about control. She was trying to gain a little power in a situation where she felt unsure and inadequate. I felt I needed to give her a way of having power without confirming her belief that she wasn't good enough to do it (which is what I thought would happen if I filled all the letters in perfectly for her).

So I decided to have a tantrum. I huffed and grumbled that I was rubbish and I couldn't do it. I said "I can't!" I pretended to cry about it. I said she had to help me do it.

With a tiny smirk, she filled in the first letter, free handed. I looked at her, wide-eyed, and said "You wrote a 'mm'" Not praising, just a statement.

This game continued until all the letters were filled: she would tell me to do it, I would have a little tantrum, and then she would cheekily fill it in herself. She finished the whole page independently.

Now, they weren't perfect, and she didn't mind, we'd had a fun game and she'd managed to do it all.

Playful Parenting and self-reflection are things I'm really keen to share with other parents because it's so easy to fall into the trap of only ever treating your kid 'one way.' We tend to speak to NP in quite a mature manner, having conversations and reasoning with her about behaviour or routine. This works OK if she can see the point of what we're saying. However, sometimes she gets into this state of mind where she wants to 'play up,' causing escalating irritation and eventual arguments that negate the whole point of what we were trying to achieve at the time.

'Playing up' normally happens when one of the Onions clan (myself or Mr O) is trying to 'teach.' Be it writing, drawing, cooking or how to use something, NP gets frustrated, we get frustrated, she giggles in our faces and we get annoyed. NOT the best way of inspiring self-directed learning, huh? On many occasions we didn't adapt our approach, we just kept forcing our way upon her, to little success (see where the self-reflection comes in?) So, in the future, instead of seeing it as 'playing up' I'm going to think more about 'playing,' period.

A day in our life

I decided the best way to kick off our Home Educating journey would be to join the Patch of Puddles "A Typical Home Ed Day in Photos" carnival!

Now, you might notice I don't do a lot of photo blogging, so forgive me if this goes slightly wrong, I have no idea what I'm doing :)

Today had NP and me pottering about the house, buying new shoes, having lunch out and going to Stay and Play (a group for 0 - 5's). Bit of an expensive day all in all, but good times were had (apart from usual grumbles about walking too much).

We started the day with some Jolly Phonics songs over breakfast, with 'clicking castanets' resulting in a quick percussion session:

From 16 May 2011

Mommy had to do 'a a ants on my arm' too:

From 16 May 2011

From 16 May 2011

Daddy gave us a book about Greek Mythology last night so we read about Cerberus and Hades:

From 16 May 2011

Getting the percussion instruments out of the cupboard reminded us about the Timmy Time Pop Up game we keep in there, so we had a few goes with that:

From 16 May 2011

After a quick drink we got our snack and worked some more on our new sound with a Jolly Phonics worksheet:

From 16 May 2011

Bit of our favourite background music (and a promise of watching some of the film later):

From 16 May 2011

Some workbooks seemed like a good idea:

From 16 May 2011

We didn't get any photos in the shoe shop but we had a lovely lunch then made our way to Stay and Play where we had some messy fun:

From 16 May 2011

From 16 May 2011

After a lovely (and exhausting!) walk home:

From 16 May 2011

we settled down to watch Bilbo:

From 16 May 2011

Then I cooked dinner, Daddy came home and we ate and had cuddles!

Today was definitely a 'busy' day. We don't always work on phonics every day, but I do try to introduce a new sound each week. NP started Jolly Phonics at the failed nursery and ate it up, so we decided to carry on at home. Normally we spend a lot of time just hanging out, playing games, watching TV or going to the park or library. I don't really believe NP needs much 'educating' at this age, but I take advantage of the opportunities. For about 6 weeks I've left the phonics things lying on the table for her to pick up at her will, some days she has a go, some days she doesn't. Today was a day when she felt comfortable and interested enough to have a go.

Phew, I hope that was enlightening or at least un-boring! I can't guarantee whether my future posts will or will not be like this one, like I said, this is new territory for me. Feedback always appreciated :)

Click on the house picture to see more Carnival entries!

Making Daisy Chains in the Sun

More and more, I'm finding that I care less and less what other people think.

When NP was in nursery I felt a strange obligation to fit in with the other parents, but, being the reserved and socially inept individual that I am, I would stand alone instead of striking up conversation at the gate. I think this is partly down to the co-incidence of all having had a child within the appropriate 12 month period, but having absolutely *nothing else* in common. But, if I'm going to be truly honest, it's due to the fact I have no idea what to talk to them about. Especially when all they have to give in return are one word answers and (if they're feeling generous) an awkward smile.

Today felt different. I was in the same place, at the same time, collecting NP from a different setting. I arrive first and parked my bum on the grass to enjoy the sunshine. We've been quite into daisy chains lately, so I started making one for NP as a 'hello!' gift (she does love her incentives to get home). The mums, dads and grandparents gathered like a tribe of penguins, tightly packing together under the all-weather awning, talking sh*t and being boring.

I felt relaxed and carefree, poking daisy stems and threading them together. When "Reece!" wouldn't stand still and got a gob full from his mother I didn't even 'tut' disapprovingly. (Poor old "Reece!" he couldn't look at anything a two year old might find interesting whilst his mother was waiting for "Jack!" and grumbling at "Matthew!'s" Mum.)

It was surreal, sitting there, apart, and not wanting to be any closer. Not thinking that I *ought* to *try* getting to know those people. Maybe I could get along with many of them, perhaps one of them could be a good friend. That would be cool. But, right there, at that moment in time, I was so happy to be me, doing what *I* felt happy doing. I was not standing alone in a crowd, masquerading as a part of something, I was sitting alone, feeling comfortable with the decision to be different.

As I've been writing this, I've been wondering what my point is. Why should it matter where I stand when I'm collecting my kid from playgroup? And my answer is this: it's not about the physical reality. It's about the feeling: the realisation, in my mental space, that I'm happy not to be a part of the cohort. I'm happy that I don't have local gossip to share and a place in the pecking order. I'm happy to wait for my girl, and make daisy chains in the sun.

School

A slight epiphany descended upon my sofa-ensconced form just a moment ago.

I've had concerns about how NP is settling into nursery (settling?! She's been at the place since September!). I've gone the usual channels, spoken to the teacher, talked to NP about it, all to find that, come the start of each new half term, she hates it, come the start of the holidays she's slightly settled (which gets thrown off during the week/fortnight she doesn't attend).

It seems that the pressure to do what the teachers say creates a little demon inside her brain that tells, nay, insists, that she does as much as possible to disrupt this arrangement.

Well, what a surprise, my child is stubbornly independent and doesn't want to be told what to do.
She told me the other day that the other children are 'boring'.

I told the teacher that NP enjoys learning facts, and is, we would say, pretty smart.

The instant I suggested this, the teacher countered with the fact that NP cannot write. Some children start nursery being able to write, apparently (whoopee, bully for them) but NP doesn't want to, and insists on 'being helped' which, 'is perfectly fine of course'.

Hmm, yeah. I'm sure it's fine. That's why, instead of grasping onto the positive information I just gave you, you're focusing on the things she 'can't' do.

You know what? I don't give a flying f*ck whether she can write perfectly. She loves trying: she wrote 'Happy Birthday' for her cousin the other day by tracing over what I had written. The fact that she wants help to do it isn't a problem, except when you've got 20 others to deal with, Mrs Teacher.

And what is writing, after all? Here's my epiphany: it's a means to an end, it's an addendum to the actual task of learning stuff. The fact that she loves to absorb information is much more important to me at this time. Teaching her right and wrong, letting her explore the things that interest her and giving her chance to grow. These are the things that I care about. She'll come to writing in her own time.

Focusing on a physical lag seems like a fast track to a frustrated mind to me. I want to explore that mind, give her chance to use it, before she shuts it off because other people don't care.

Toys that we like

Previous post had me thinking about what kinds of toys NP plays with, and why it is that she likes them. And you know what? The stuff she likes is the stuff we show interest in with her. Not just her mom and dad, but her grandparents too, the people she spends her time with. What a surprise?!

Her most favourite thing of all time? Trains. Usually Thomas, but not always. Every single member of her family has encouraged this interest by buying her trains, playing with them, taking her on train rides and talking about them. Her favourite thing to do during a day at home is to take out the top draw of her toy box and empty the whole lot of cars, trains and other vehicles onto the floor, then delight in organising them!

Second favourite, her gazillions of cuddly toys - she has 'a family' including Baby Little Spongebob, Big Mommy Spongebob and Daddy Patrick. Again, her whole family know how much she loves her toys and we all talk about them regularly. These toys are her bedtime entertainment mornings and evenings, she tells them stories, looks after them and projects her fears of badgers and squirrels onto them. Mommy normally eats the badgers these days though.

Another fave is probably musical instruments, tambourines, bells, keyboard, annoying noisy toys. Know why? Probably because there's a bunch of our real and toy instruments lying around, to-wit: 3 guitars (acoustic, electric and bass); my flute, recorder, rock band guitar, drums and mic; a box full of hand-held percussion items and an upright piano.

Otherwise, she likes anything she can make stories up with, little characters that she gives directions and a continuous monologue of their daily lives; or books. This kid devours books. It makes a librarian's daughter proud.

So I find it difficult to agree when people say that young kids decide on their tastes without influence from their family. The stuff she likes are the things we've encouraged, the stuff she gets excited over are the things we get excited over. She likes Star Wars because mommy is only too happy to oblige with the 10th re-watch of Return of the Jedi. She's not the picture of girly-girlness, that's for sure.

Nevertheless, she likes wearing jewellery, hair clips and painting her fingernails. Course she does, it's fun, it's like dressing up. Everyone likes dressing up. I never really bother with playing that kind of game with her, besides getting decked out in crazy outfits or making a hair cut a fun game. But she sees me get dressed up and spend ages in front of the mirror so I'm obviously modelling behaviour for her, even if I don't wear make-up. Thus, even the things I don't actively engage her with, if she sees me doing them, she wants to do them too. Thankfully, I have a little control over that and can modify my own behaviour by considering how it looks in her eyes.

It's going to change when peer pressure becomes part of her life, but all we can do is keep talking and challenging her. Until then, I know I'm going to get plenty of enjoyment from playing with the toys we both enjoy.

Child returns to nursery, mom returns to the world at large

It has probably not escaped your attention that I've been absent since July. Hey, what happened in July? Oh, just my lovely daughter 24/7!

I don't begrudge her, but it's been a tough time.

Anyway, anyone interested in little girls and gender roles should go read this blog passed on to me via a lovely friend, who got it from the beautiful and talented Felicia Day who I didn't realise had done anything awesome since Buffy, but she did, and she is (awesome, that is).

A taste of what Jolie O'Dell has to say on the subject of Women in Tech (from the first link):

"So, to all the special interest groups and fine individuals with fine intentions, I ask you one favor: Please stop pushing for more women in tech, and find a young girl to mentor instead. When she is young, give her “boy toys” and video games. If she wants one, get her a laptop instead of jewelry for her birthday. Tell her not to worry about flirting or her hair. Send her to a computer science camp or space camp. Encourage her to take advanced maths and sciences in school and to enter a computer science degree program."

Awesome too, right?

I'll try and write more soon, but I have another project I'm working on, which I might end up linking here, or I might keep anonymous, not sure yet.

Leave a comment guys if you're still here, please help my overwrought-mommy-ego!!

3 years old

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?

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.

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.

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

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:

• female protagonist
• going on a quest/journey of discovery
• preferably fantasy
• NO VAMPIRE ROMANCES
  

Thanks!

BBC4 Women: Mothers

NOTE: My other reviews of 'Libbers' and 'Activists' can be found here:
first thoughts
2nd watching
Activists

Mothers
Yes, I watched it, and I have lots to say.

Mostly I resented the demographic represented, but again, how else would it be pitched on this channel? I do believe that only one family lived north of London, and the parents in that family were both academics. I suppose it's appealing to the lowest common denominator, to just interview (stereo)typical nuclear families. However, there are SO many feminist families who are anything but typical!

Personally, it would have felt a much more rounded documentary if the lives of feminist families were included, e.g. non-working feminists mums, queer parents, mothers who stay at home but fill their lives with things other than children.

(Not to say that the stay-at-home parents featured in the program DON'T do other things, but the documentary didn't seem to show them doing anything other than 'typical' parenting - baking, play-groups, washing, yawn).

What about the parents staying at home and providing home-education? What about mothers who give up their time for voluntary groups (coughcough breastfeedingpeersupport)? What about working class mums who don't have a bloody choice in the matter?

Isn't it wonderful to pontificate about 'choice' when the people without a choice have no voice?

Furthermore on the subject of what a parent does, how about the question put to the Oxford graduate:

'what is the point of your education, do you need a degree from Oxford in order to stay home and look after your children?'

Well, those who know me can imagine my reaction.

(something along the lines of 'fiery wrath'?)

The fact that education for its own sake is not even considered astounds me. Once an educational level has been achieved it is always there to fall back on, use, or add to. I absolutely agree with the mother: she can pass her knowledge on to her children. I feel so passionate about my academic achievements and goals, but I also feel passionate about bringing up my daughter in the way I have chosen.

Why should motherhood negate education and the urge to be educated? Is education only compatible with working and earning? That sounds quite capitalist to me.

However, on to the thing I enjoyed: watching the squirming when Engle asked what activities they each do around the home. It was good to reinforce the idea that washing, organising and cleaning are not a realm of natural knowledge - it is learnt through trial and error, paying attention, reading, PLANNING and thinking, before doing. It's too easy to get drawn into always doing something because your other half 'doesn't do it well enough'. How the hell did that partner learn to do it in the first place?

Anyway, that aside, it's perfectly understandable that Vanessa Engle may have wanted to highlight the inherent sexism in the standard nuclear family. Today, that kind of sexism often goes unchallenged and is held up as a shining example of what family life should be about. However, my question is, can't we have some positive examples? Can't we see what other people are doing and be inspired, rather than depressed?

Mr Onions regularly challenges me, asking me if I am ever going to read something positive about feminism. Well, I put that challenge to this doc: make me feel positive next week, I want to see something good about feminist activism, some passion, some success, some positive ideas. Lets leave this sadness behind, please?

Suri Cruise

What a kerfuffle

The reason these photos were taken may not be cool but, man, that skirt is gorgeous.

I don't agree with young children wearing high heels, they need to learn to walk in proper shoes that support their feet. I can't escape noticing, however, that Katie isn't wearing heels. Which suggests to me that Suri might just really like dressing up. What mother would put her child in a pair of heels when she herself isn't even wearing them? One who is encouraging their child to have creativity and choice in her clothes.

What parent HASN'T had a kid that wants to walk around in mommy's/daddy's shoes? It was only a few weeks ago I watched my friend's little boy trot around the Wacky Warehouse in his mama's totally awesome stiletto boots!

Or I could just be being idealistic and Suri has already been brainwashed into received ideas about femininity. Whatever.

Question...

There's a certain online forum [link redacted] that seems to be a place for women who pretend they're not yummy mummy's (but really are) to bitch about other yummy mummy's. It actually makes me feel a bit ill to read the way they snipe at other women.

In this forum women were bitching about stuff that I *loved* to do as a kid, that my daughter also seems to like doing. There's some kind of misunderstanding going on where they seem to think that all parents who encourage their kids to do certain activities are being pushy, rather than the (more accurate, in my case) fact that you're giving them the experience to find out what they like doing.

I don't get it, do they just not connect with their kids? I loved doing stuff with my parents. The only thing that I remember being particularly bored by as a kid is documentaries. But I quite enjoy them now. Funny eh?

Baby love

A little extract from the times website that has made me furious...

'That is one side of the story: the disruption and chaos. The other, often equally unexpected development is the degree to which you adore your baby. For many women, the love they feel for their child far and away surpasses anything they have ever experienced before. At first you don’t really notice it – sure, this small pink bundle is adorable and absorbing, but you are still getting used to each other. And then somewhere around week three, quite possibly when you are dozing off at 4am, with this little milky person asleep by your side and the soothing sounds of the BBC World Service drifting from the radio, it suddenly hits you, with the force of an oncoming train: you love this thing more than life itself.

This love is a new kind of love. It is, in the true sense of the word, unconditional. The media, society, other mothers with something to prove, like to hymn this great novel love as a tremendous nirvana, the deepest truth of the female heart. But paradoxically, it can be extremely frightening, not just for the mother, whose happiness now depends on this highly unstable bundle of new human flesh and blood, whose very sanity can feel as if it hinges on one tiny human continuing to breathe, but also for her partner. Adjusting from being the centre of a person’s universe to being a distant satellite is never easy, especially if the ego involved is male.'

I have put in bold the part that has given me an angry cold feeling in my chest and stomach.

It is something that is not addressed very often and is difficult for many women to talk about, due to the social expectations expressed so perfectly in articles such as the one quoted above.

Sure, it seems as though the article is balanced, the 'great love' opposed to the 'great fear'. But what about those women who, upon leaving the surreal dream-drama of hospital, find that they DON'T have these feelings? The feelings that every magazine, film, relative and condescending well-wisher has told them they are going to have?

What about those women who feel numb or even resentful towards their tiny baby? Who find themselves in a cycle of hate and guilt because they have not been told that they might feel like this, and that it is perfectly natural?

I'm not talking about the 'baby blues', something that is defined to women as 'feeling a bit low and tearful' after the birth, due to changing hormones. Hell, I'm not even talking about Post-Natal Depression, something that is rightfully getting the publicity it requires. I'm talking about women who do not feel the instant indescribable joy of loving their baby.

It's an issue that is addressed in relation to men, usually described as having difficulty 'bonding'. It's almost expected that men will have 'problems', after all, they haven't carried the child, they haven't had the physical trial of giving birth or the huge relief of it all being over. However, it's equally expected of women that they will be instantly in love with the spasming little being that has just emerged from them. (Perhaps you find my terminology a little unsettling? Read it again, it's little more than an actual description of a newborn, we're just so inclined towards a romantic picture of birth that we balk at blank descriptions).

I maintain that this is a damaging part of 'mummy culture'. Never mind the war over breast versus bottle or 'stay-at-home' versus 'working mother', this ingrained notion that women adore their babies is one of the most emotionally damaging issues for a new mother who doesn't fit the social expectation. Imagine being told by a stream of visitors how much you love your child, and being asked 'isn't it amazing?' when you have no idea what they're talking about, but you continue to smile and agree, because otherwise you would be weird.

It is important that new mothers understand this can happen, and that they are not alone. But I think most new mums can testify that it is one of the busiest, but also loneliest times of their lives. I truely feel that the media ought to play a part in reminding women that the stereotypes aren't the 'be all and end all'. The few outlets a lot of mothers have in those first weeks are magazines and television. If this myth of maternal love were questioned more regularly in these forums then those lonely women might feel reassured. Well meaning relatives and visitors can be excused, as they often only have their own experiences to draw upon, but the media should be obliged to represent a balanced and well researched message.

Yes, I suppose I am an incurable idealist, expecting media sources to provide anything other than thinly veiled opinions, but when they are often the only place where alternative interpretations can be found then they are an important resource that should act responsibly towards their consumers. If the message were out there more often and obvious then perhaps even the doting families would be sensitive to alternative experiences of new motherhood.

Alpha mummy?

Who writes this crap?

Is this what being middle class is? Drinking yourself silly before (and after!) the kids are in bed and fantasising over men other than your husband?

More than 1/2 of that list involves lusting after other men, dreaming about dating again or other such day-dreams of infidelity. Really, are these women actually enjoying their 'Alpha Mummy' lives? It doesn't sound like it.

This list actively constructs the stereotype of vapid, ungrateful, selfish bitches. it's not even funny. It goes to show that it's not just misogyny that is a problem for feminism, but also women's own attitudes to themselves!

I thought Alpha Mummy's were the highly driven career women we hear so much about. Not drunken, jealous, lazy cows who can't appreciate the man they decided to have children with. I realise the list is supposed to be a revelation that Alpha Mummys' try, but actually fail to be perfect. I realise that for the middle class snob, who would enjoy this drivel, there could be some kind of amused recognition in reading the piece. But not me.

I actually appreciate my partner, he is wonderful. I actually enjoy being semi-intellectual, I like being able to discuss things other than shopping and celebrities. And, along a different line, I don't think it's clever or funny to brand yourself as a bad parent.

Alongside my ranting about how I don't agree with the ideas in the article, I think there's also a perfectly valid point to be made about women who DO recognise themselves in the list. The presupposition is that if you do these things, then you ARE a bad mother/wife. Brilliant, way to go, just go and knock every other women who reads it and thinks that they *must* be bad if they don't constantly live up to the stereotype. Once again I'll bring it back to the ideology: stating that a person who fulfills this description is a bad mother is a subtle reinforcement of an ideology of perfection.

It's hard enough with the media representations of 'perfect' celebrity mums (Angelina?), but at least with celebrities, they *are* of a completely different world to the rest of us. When a supposedly 'real woman' blog reinforces that you are failing as a parent if you
let your kids watch a bit to much TV, (and who decides how much is too much anyway?) then, although you may be laughing on the outside, your idea of the perfect mother has just been reconstructed. It's only a small step from here to considering that aspects of your life could be counted as 'failings'.

Articles like this might seem harmless, but combined with other media and peer pressures, it amounts to social conditioning. If you're reading this and mocking me for going over the top, it just goes to show how implicit this ideology of perfect mothering is. The 'joke' of the article is based on the fact that the 'super mum' idea does exist, but real people find it unobtainable. But is it really amusing that these people now class themselves as bad parents because of this? Ha ha, we're all laughing because 'oh, we must be such bad parents because we do this!' The ideology takes away the idea that different parents deal with parenting in different ways. This article serves to represent parenting as black and white: the right way, or the wrong way.

I'm not going to say that I must be a bad parent because I don't agree with this. No, I know I am a good parent because I have a happy child. The kind of opinion presented in the Alpha Mummy article takes away this option and, in my opinion, is damaging to women's views of their own styles and abilities.

Seems I'm not the only one...

And following from my previous rant, imagine how I felt to find this in the news yesterday.
I suppose in some ways it covers my undercurrent feelings about the whole issue of bringing up children.

I believe that all children deserve to have the love and commitment that only family can provide and that children can really achieve their full potential in that kind of environment. This is not to say that I disparage working mothers, my own mother worked full time as I was growing up, (and still does!) yet I have a close relationship with her and relate to my parents much better than many of my friends and acquaintances. However, when I was a child, neither of my grandmothers worked, and thus I always had family around to look after me. The same goes for my partner, though the child of a single working mother, he was cared for by his grandmother. But now, our parents are in their late 40s/early 50s and still working. They'll probably be working until retirement, they don't have any other option. So what can our generation do, if they have to work, but put the children in childcare?

Nevertheless, it feels terrible to me that some children are being brought up full time in nurseries, where the ratio for child to carer ranges from 3:1 for children under 2, to 8:1 for children 3 to 8. Even with all the facilities and activities they will have available, what sort of loving, nurturing environment can the children be experiencing? What terrible habits will they be learning behind the busy carer's back?! (I really don't know!)

However even with my dislike of childcare and desire to keep my daughter at home, I don't accept the stance on 'working mothers' suggested by this report, take a couple of quotes for example:

'It also suggests that having many more working mothers has contributed to the damage done to children.

"Most women now work and their new economic independence contributes to levels of family break-up which are higher in the UK than in any other Western European country."'

Firstly, what is this damage? The article directly quotes:

"Children with separate, single or step parents are 50% more likely to fail at school, have low esteem, be unpopular with other children and have behavioural difficulties, anxiety or depression,"

OK, so the original report states that broken families cause the 'damage' and that the working mother 'contributes' to the break-ups. The BBC has decided to restate this as as assumption that it is working mothers that cause damage to children, not broken families.

There is no mention of men bringing up children, it completely side steps this issue in favour of a sly attack on career women, a strategy which manages to subtly reinforce the theme in society that it is wrong for men to stay at home and wrong for women to work. Way to go with progress.

And how about this quote for some lovely 'old fashioned values:'

"Most women now work and their new economic independence contributes to levels of family break-up"

So, how exactly does female economic independence contribute to family break-ups? What is the correlation here? What about cheating partners? What about irreconcilable differences? What about 'we just don't love one another any more'? Is it the case that in the past women were trapped in the family situation because of having no money of their own? IS THIS MORE DESIRABLE?!?!

I am completely in agreement that parents should take more personal responsibility for raising children, and also agree with some of the measures suggested: free parenting classes available around the time of birth, free psychological and family support if relationships struggle and rules making it easier for parents to stay at home to rear their children. However, what I can't stand is the pervasive sexism inherent in the argument, the ideology is so entrenched that you can't even see it if you're not looking for it.

Changing my attitudes...

Having never been particularly affected by either feminism or sexism, I have tootled along for most of my existence completely oblivious to the two concepts. However, as I think about it more and more (and study it intensely for university), I'm finding myself drawn to feminism. However, I do have concerns about some feminist issues, particularly the gender gap in pay.

Women still don't earn as much as men, particularly if they bring up children. But is this 'bringing up children' qualification an important point? As a mother myself I feel quite strongly about being there for my daughter as she grows up, particularly while she is below school age. I don't want another person bringing up my daughter, I want to have a direct and fulfilling influence upon her in her formative years, which takes me out of the job market for at least 3 years, preferably 4. However, as a university student, I have outlaid a huge amount of (borrowed) money to get myself an in-depth education in linguistics. I have nearly finished my degree and my daughter is now 18 months old. Unfortunately, staying out of employment keeps my debt growing to the kind of level where I can't even conceive the amount of money I owe.

But this is the literal price I am paying for wanting the best of both worlds. I am not the kind of woman who is driven by career aspirations, I am much more a mother than a worker. However, I will not deny that I am also driven by intellectual achievement. Thus I am going to want to work, in some capacity, at some point. If we hadn't had our daughter we would be 3 years better off financially. So do we deserve to earn as much as if we hadn't had a baby? I doubt many people would be convinced by an argument for this stance, after all, it was our decision to have a child. Knowing full well our values and opinions on raising children, it should have been a sacrifice we had factored into the decision.

However, it shouldn't be the case that women are disadvantaged because of having children, if they feel they have to go back to work asap to keep their job, or if they have to give up breastfeeding because they have to work in order to feed the family. My situation is lucky, I haven't got a job to lose. But never mind the mothers, what about those children losing out on a family environment because parents (and grandparents!) have to work?

Is this women's lib? Going back to work, leaving your child in an extortionate nursery? Is the world forcing women to lose perspective on their priorities? Of course, for many women their career is an important part of their life, but if they decide to have children, surely there should be a shift in focus? Perhaps a loss in earnings is a suitable price to pay for the knowledge that you have provided a strong parental influence in their early years. Notwithstanding, men are equally as capable as women at bringing up their children, and I applaud men who chose to do this, but with young babies, breastfeeding is also a factor that should be considered.

Now, it's perfectly acceptable for people to jump up and shout me down with arguments like 'but I can't afford to stay at home and bring up my child.' I know I've been extremely lucky to have a partner who can support us all. But, consider this: we live within our means. We choose not to have another child because we could not afford to provide for another and we choose not to spend lots of money on ourselves.

So, with all this in mind, I still feel drawn to feminism, but with a traditional slant. I want to stay at home and look after my daughter, but I also want to have the chance to earn an equivalent wage to my partner. However, I don't believe I should automatically expect to earn as much as him over my whole working life. He is already working and is obviously going to have earned more money than me. It is my choice to stay at home and I will bear the costs. The only issue I have is having access to an equivalent basic pension, for which there is already a system in place. Obviously, all situations are different and this is a very personal perspective on a personal situation. I acknowledge I'm speaking from a highly privileged position and welcome alternative views on the issue.