CurrentMom

Exhuasted by the Mommy Wars

Work Wednesday

I'm tired. Too tired to think, too tired to type, and, ummm, too tired to blog.

So, I apologize in advance if this week's post is, well, a bit weary. It's not just that it's been a crazy month with visiting parents, holiday celebrations, my son's birthday, my wedding anniversary, two international trips (one personal, one work) and the rest of the activities and commitments that make up my regular routine.  It's this:

I am tired of the "mommy wars."

In the last few weeks, the "mommy wars" seem to have mutated from a mostly far-off skirmish (albeit, one that never completely goes away) to a hot home front battle. There have been a slew of articles, commentary and "analysis" from politicians, pundits, and bloggers drumming up the conflict.  (Just Google "mommy wars" and you'll see.) The line of fire has come from multiple directions including the Ann Romney-Hilary Rosen row and French feminist Elisabeth Badinter's new book, The Conflict: How Modern Motherhood Undermines the Status of Women. (Actually, more on that when I'm awake. From what I've read about the book and Badinter's philosophy, it will be a controversial but interesting read.)

While much of this mommy war-mongering seems phony, manufactured cynically to sway women voters and sell books, it's clear that there are still some real divisions in society over motherhood and work. The Pew Research Center recently reported that while society has, more or less, come to a consensus that values women in the workforce, there's still a lot of what Pew termed "ambivalence" about working moms, especially moms with young children working outside the home. (In fact, 37% of Americans think that this is "bad" for society.) Sometimes, when that ambivalence is stoked, the "mommy wars" erupt.

Quick Thoughts on Parents and Pseudonymity

Technology Tuesday

Debate continues to swirl around Google's ill-conceived and poorly-implemented (I'm trying to be charitable here) policy regarding what people are allowed to call themselves on GooglePlus. I have extremely strong views on this question, from nearly every angle: technology, policy, social implications, and practicality. In short, though, my view comes down to my belief that as a matter of fundamental self-determination and respect for human rights, people should be able to decide for themselves how they wish to be named in a social situation. Google does not agree.

Those who have the knee-jerk response of "Well, anyone who doesn't want to use their real name has got something to hide or is just out to cause trouble" are, at best, cosmically misinformed. The notion that if "real names" (a term which, by the way, is nearly impossible to define - go ahead, give it a try) are good enough for the wealthy geeks at Google it should be good enough for anyone just reeks of massive privilege. (Frankly, the way Google's been implementing their 'policy' also reeks of colonialism - if you've got a nice, comfortable looking 'wasponym' as your name at G+, you're probably fine, it seems, at least based on what people have been documenting about their clownish banning and reinstatement behavior so far.) I've been reading, thinking, and writing about identity and privacy stuff for more than a decade, and the more I learn, the more I come to agree with jwz, who said:

the other night I had dinner with a friend which turned into an hour long argument over it, because he thought that forcing everyone to use their real names was just fine. This is someone I've known for decades, so to say that I was shocked and horrified by his attitude is an understatement. It was as if my friend had suddenly started beginning sentences with, "I'm not a racist, but..."

Then there are those who like to offer the oh-so-sage advice: "If you don't like, it leave." But that's pretty naive as well.  As Alice Marwick noted in this post (do read the whole thing):

Identity is Messy

Image via Wikipedia

Technology Tuesday

Another week goes by, another impetus for everyone to fret about identity online. In this case, as the New York Times puts it, " ‘Gay Girl in Damascus’ Blogger Admits to Writing Fiction Disguised as Fact." Turns out the gay Syrian blogger writing about oppressive conditions there was: not gay, not Syrian, and not there.

In a telephone interview with The Lede on Monday morning, Mr. MacMaster, who is currently in Turkey, said, “I sort of by accident… created something that had a lot more interest than I had ever possibly expected and then when I tried to shut it down it just kept getting bigger.” He explained that he had initially created Amina, his Arab lesbian character, as “a handle” he would use when he wanted to contribute comments to online discussions. His aim, he said was to use the character to present “a perspective that doesn’t often get heard on the Middle East and that was also a challenge for me, as somebody who has aspirations as a novelist, to write in a voice of a character who is absolutely not me.”

I was not following this blog but had heard some buzz about it, especially after an entry was posted asserting that "Amina" had been taken by Syrian security forces. From what I've been able to quickly piece together, Andy Carvin (the amazing @acarvin on Twitter - doing really innovative work as a senior strategist at NPR) was key to surfacing the truth. Here's one NPR story about it. You can scan his twitter stream for more links and conversation.

This isn't the first Internet pseudonym that got out of hand. In this case, even the U.S. State Department was involved. The most interesting post I've read about the whole thing so far (before the blogger's entry was revealed) was an exploration of pseudonymity and repression by Zeynep Tufeckci. A snippet:

Brunch Recipes for Kid-Frazzled Dummies

Meal Monday

Guest post by Stephanie Gallagher.

Brunch. 

Smooth jazz. Freshly-brewed coffee. Porcelain cups with saucers - the kind that make pleasant clinking sounds when you pause to take a bite of your croissant. Intelligent conversation…

OK, so that's my brunch fantasy. 

It hasn't been a reality for me since the first time breakfast meant a handful of saltines washed down with a swig of seltzer water (which is, by the way, a sure-fire cure for morning sickness, should you be in need of such a tip).

But brunch remains one of my favorite meals (the others being breakfast, lunch, dinner and dessert).
And if you find yourself in the position of hosting brunch, as many of us do in the spring, whether for Easter, Mother's Day or just for fun, consider yourself lucky. For it is truly one of the easiest, most fun meals to make.

Crack a few eggs, saute a mushroom or two, maybe flip on the blender to whip up a smoothie, and voila! You've got brunch.

And if you're having the kind of crowd who doesn't have Lidia Bastianich Tivoed, brunch is one of those meals where you can make a big splash with very little work.

Here are a few of my favorite brunch recipes.

Responding to the Japan Earthquake

Message Monday

Guest post by Chiaki Kawajiri

I was awoken by a friend’s phone call that day. “There was a big earthquake in Japan.”

I tried to find out where it originated, then called my family and friends.The phone lines didn’t work. I couldn’t get hold of anyone.

Next day, I was able to talk with my family and friends except two of my dear friends. One lived near the fire explosion, and the other lived in the closest town to where the earthquake originated. I kept calling all over the place  and searched the web to find my friends, but he was nowhere to be found.

I cried for two days. On the third day, when my son came home from school, I asked him how his day went. "We studied about Tsunami today," he said, then stopped. When I asked why he stopped, he told me because the words "tsunami" and "earthquake" make me sad and cry.

With my son’s words, out of respect for the sufferers, I decided to stop crying and began constructing a simple, easy-to-navigate, to-the-point information website for Japanese. From thousands of miles away, that is the least I could do.