Kids
Stop drinking that! A Thirsty Nation’s Dilemma
Several weeks ago, when I voiced my misgivings about what a pregnant woman with a voracious thirst should drink, it paved the way for much larger questions that touches all of our lives, preggo or no: “Wait, what ARE we drinking“? “What’s IN this can/glass/bottle/cup, anyway“?
In recent news there has been a spirited debate about whether the government should impose a penny-per-ounce tax on soda and other sugary beverages. The fact that it has garnered so much attention by the national media shows us how interwoven soda and its affordability is to our national fabric. And although I’m not prepared to weigh in on whether such a tax might promote a healthier lifestyle, I’m listening intently to the debate. And I’m aghast at what I’m learning simply by paying a little attention.
I’ll say this out front: I like a good glass of juice or lemonade, but otherwise I’m not a big fan of sweet drinks. My tea contains neither sugar nor honey, nor does my morning coffee contain sugar or cream. I’ve never been a soda person, though I’m no stranger to the occasional can. My choices in wine and alcoholic beverages are always dry. For me, it’s just a matter of what my taste buds prefer. So suffice to say that I do not have a personal stake in this debate.
Given where I’m coming from, I’d like to match up two opposing arguments that I’ve heard; exhibit A and exhibit B:
Exhibit A: Lobbyist for the soda industry appearance on MSNBC within the last few weeks (apologies for not being able to provide specific show/guest info) making the case that beverages account for only 5 Percent of daily caloric intake for the average American, and that the blame that such a tax implies is patently unfair, an argument similar to the one defended by Kevin Keane of the American Beverage Association in this Chron.com article.
Exhibit B: Eat This, Not That‘s documentation of the 20 worst drinks in America, including the “worst soda“, Sunkist; a 20 ounce bottle contains 320 calories and 84 grams of sugar, as much as 6 Breyers Oreo Ice Cream Sandwiches. Additionally, Sunkist makes use of “the artificial colors yellow 6 and red 40—two chemicals that may be linked to behavioral and concentration problems in children”. WikiAnswers lists the ingredients in Sunkist as these: “Carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup and/or sugar, citric acid, sodium benzoate (preservative), food starch-modified, natural flavors, caffeine, glycerol ester of wood rosin, ascorbic acid (preservative), yellow 6, red 40″.
So, according to the argument posed in Exhibit A, if one measly 20oz bottle of Sunkist was all the caloric beverage that you drank for an entire day, your overall calorie intake could be extrapolated to 6400. Is this reasonable? Would even Kevin Keane agree that this is reasonable? And I wonder whether he would be willing to weigh in on the effect of the ingredients list: high fructose corn syrup, yellow 6, red 40; as well as what specific ingredient tends to hide behind the term “natural flavors” (hint: MSG). So, it seems to me that this “don’t pick on us because there are other, bigger fish to fry” is really just awfully sad. And although the proposed soda tax has been defeated on the several occasions thus far that it has shown up as proposed legislature in Maine, New York, and San Francisco, I hope that the movement gains momentum, and that in time, the American Beverage Association does have its fish fried. I’ll take a water with that.
In the meantime, if a 2000 calorie-per-day diet is the ideal for most of us, let’s really try, as a culture, to observe that 5% idea — really, it turns out not to be such a bad one — 5% of your calories from beverages: that’s 100 calories a day. Let’s just all pay a little closer attention to the labels and try to observe this. It’d be way more effective to our lifestyle than a tax, though our states would still be that much more cash-strapped.
If just 100 calories to drink a day sounds way too restrictive, note the following from TLC Cooking: “look at the calorie count of any soft drink. For example, a typical carbonated soft drink will have 200 calories in a 16-ounce serving. All of those calories come from sugar, and sugar contains 16 calories per teaspoon. By this measurement, a 16-ounce serving contains 12.5 teaspoons of sugar.So go down to the kitchen and get out a 16-ounce glass, a teaspoon and some sugar. Measure 12 teaspoons of sugar into the glass — it’s an amazing amount. Then multiply that by however many sodas you typically consume in a day”.
For further reading, see also New England Journal of Medicine’s “Ounces of Prevention — The Public Policy Case for Taxes on Sugared Beverages”, and the New York Times’s “Health Official Willing to go to the Mat Over Obesity and Sugared Sodas”
Are Moms Really That Busy?
Yesterday, for the first time ever, I watched the Dr. Phil show. No, I haven’t been living in a cave; it seems I’ve always known about Dr. Phil, it’s just that the TV here is, 99% of the time, switched off during the day. And I like it that way.
But I was compelled to watch yesterday’s show, “Are Moms Really That Busy?” in support of my Champaign-Urbana homie, Amy Hatch, who is half of the awesome duo behind chambanamoms.com. She made an appearance on Dr. Phil’s panel in order to debate a recent finding by University of Maryland’s Dr. John Robinson that moms have, on average, 30-40 hours of leisure time each week.
It’s an easy thing to get a knee-jerk reaction to – particularly if you are among the aforementioned moms who are spread reeeeeally really thin in order to be the best mom and caregiver and housekeeper and working professional that they can be. The consensus on the panel as to Dr. Robinson’s findings can be summed up the following way: “Are you freakin KIDDING me?!”. The panelists and moms in the audience were happy to provide the kind of heartbreaking detail of how patently NON-leisurely their lives really are; and how hard, in fact, they do work, and how very very much is expected of them. That they should even be put in the position of having to defend themselves on this subject is altogether insulting. Actually, “adding insult to injury” is a perfect characterization.
Of course moms will be put on the defensive by Dr. Robinson’s findings. I’m guessing that that, and the publicity surrounding it, was his aim in the first place. The absurd examples of leisure time cited by Dr. Robinson should be all the evidence we need: waiting for a tow truck (in the car w/o kids), opening business email, sitting in the dentist’s office, and the like.
But what went largely undiscussed on yesterday’s show is exactly how we should address this finding: What’s getting valued? Who’s setting the standards here? And why, for christ’s sake, is no one standing up for the very idea of leisure time? The very notion that we have leisure time carries a subtext that we’re not working hard enough.
Because if we picture it, the dream of leisure time floats above all of mom’s heads, like a detached, unattainable balloon – where one can exist, enjoying our favorite things without interruption, without guilt; outside of time and responsibility. and as much as we want and crave and need to be in that balloon, if we’re fortunate enough to have the ability to step in it, we’re afraid that others will judge us as being………..the word which can only be whispered………lazy.
Apparently, with the industrial revolution and the gadgets of the 20th century which allow for tasks to completed in a shorter amount of time, there has been a new cold war: the War on Lazy. We have become so very time and productivity obsessed that we have come to believe, as a culture, that busy-ness is the natural and right state of being. Which is counter-intuitive. One would think that the progress made in the last 200 years would allow for more leisure time, and that it would become a natural and virtuous thing. But something else happened: the standards were raised. Wash day work cut down to a few hours? Better impose a higher standard of cleanliness and sell a lot more clothes. We’ve increasingly been sold a standard that we can’t, and shouldn’t, live up to. And as moms reach a breaking point in which they can barely handle the stress of raising a family and being everything to everyone, mostly without compensation, they are made to apologize for the joke of what passes as leisure time. Shame on us.
Listen to how Brigid Schulte wraps up her fine response in the Washington Post: “it’s 1:31 in the morning; this story is two days late; the dinner dishes are still in the sink; and there’s a form I need to fill out before my daughter goes to school. For a few fleeting moments earlier this evening, however, as I searched for my son’s bike helmet, I did notice that the moon was uncannily beautiful”. The saddest of poetry, but as moms, we’ve been there. Maybe even four times already this week. So instead of going on the defensive, please join me in the following chant:
“More Leisure Time Now! Better Leisure Time Now!”
And fellow moms, when you see a television commercial which leads you to to think that your teeth should be as white as your wedding dress, and implies that anything less constitutes something sub-standard, please see this for the trap that it is, and take hold of what’s important in your life. Having flashy white teeth is not being good to yourself (though corporations would love you to believe it) – having time and a little peace in your life to enjoy yourself IS.
Max and Ruby: A Rant
If you are a TV-friendly parent to a toddler, with cable or satellite TV, you have probably seen, at one time or another, the awfully-cute show about a pair of sibling bunnies, Max and Ruby. Ruby, 7, is older sister to brother Max, 3, and the show revolves around the ongoing sibling rivalry between the two. The show is awfully tame and often very very sweet, and my Little One loves to watch it. In his eyes, he probably relates to Max, the 3 year old who loves to play in the mud and with his particularly loud wind-up toys, much to Ruby’s chagrin. The show happens in two and three segment bits, each problem being lovingly resolved within the course of each segment.
When we first started watching Max and Ruby as a family, it struck me as a little odd that Max and Ruby’s parents were nowhere to be seen. Oh well, I shrugged it off, knowing that the show was based on a series of books that I’d never read, and assumed that there was sufficient explanation within the books as to their lack of presence in the show. Then we Tivo’d the show, and the Little One began to watch it more regularly.
We watched the Thanksgiving episode. Surely mom and dad had to be around for that? Nope. Just grandma and the kids. Max and Ruby go shopping? No parents. Max and Ruby go to the fair? No parents. Have a yard sale? No parents. Ruby has pajama parties for her friends. No parents. Sure, grandma is a regular character, but she clearly has her own digs down the street.
Now curiosity is getting the best of me. I Google the explanation from Rosemary Wells, the author: “As in most other classic stories, we don’t see Max and Ruby’s parents, because I believe that kids resolve their issues and conflicts differently when they are on their own. The television series gives kids a sense about how these two siblings resolve their conflicts in a humorous and entertaining way”. Okay………I can dig it. As a rationale for a series of books, but translated into a TV show, it still is creepy for me to note the continued lack of parental involvement.
I’m all for kids having the opportunity to problem solve on their own. But when we enter into the territory of everyday family life, as the TV show has, and there is forever no sign of parents having an involvement in their kids’s activities, well, it disturbes me. Particularly considering that Max and Ruby has been reprised for a new season, with new sets of everyday adventures, and still the parents are nowhere to be seen.
Or are they? Once in a while, when Max and Ruby are playing upstairs in the house, we are treated to the sight of a closed bedroom door between Max’s room and Ruby’s room. It is tantalizing, that closed door. I get the almost palpable sense that Max and Ruby’s parents are behind it, and I have to wonder, at this point………………meth lab?
Why I Love Yo Gabba Gabba
Let’s get this straight: I am not a fan of kid’s TV programming. Through the years, I have had friends who thought that Pokemon and the Powerpuff Girls were fantastic, and the Power Rangers and Dragon Ball Z were awesome (we’re talking about adults, here, folks). Not me. Outside of a deep appreciation for Ren and Stimpy, the Simpsons, and Family Guy (which are patently NOT kid’s TV shows), I have not even been much of a fan of anything animated or developed for kids.
So I thought that when I had my own kids, TV programming would be something I’d have to endure. I dreaded the mere thought of having to watch a single episode of Barney or the Teletubbies. I stocked up on DVD sets of old school 70s Sesame Street and Electric Company, just to have something I once adored to add to the mix. What ended up happening, and what my childless self didn’t anticipate, is that you love your kid and you end up loving it when he is enjoying himself. Even when that means he enjoys watching Barney. You’re watching him watch it, and that’s pretty cool. So I did it. I watched all those shows that I dreaded, and anything he enjoyed: new Sesame Street (Elmo and all), Curious George, Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, Dora the Explorer, Go Diego Go…….and it was OK. Perhaps thankfully, he just never got into Barney OR Teletubbies.
And then one day an orange hat glided past on our TV set.
And in the half hour that followed, my ideas about what is possible in children’s programming changed. The specific episode that I watched, Episode 8 of season 1. What I saw: Yo Gabba Gabba characters Muno and Brobie doing a countdown to launch their new rocket, followed by a chorus of “up, up up, down, down, down”, done with enough childlike enthusiasm to smash to smithereens an entire season’s worth of Dora’s screechy forced-happy speak. Biz Markie (Biz freaking Markie!) doing a short beatboxing segment called “Biz’s Beat of the Day”, encouraging kids at home to follow along with his beats. The band Supernova doing a rendition of “Up and Down”, wearing space suits and jumping on trampolines while performing on stage, for the series’s regular feature, the ‘Super Music Friends Show’, which is always followed by DJ Lance calling out “listening and dancing to music is………awesome!”. And I felt what I hadn’t felt since I was watching shows I loved as a kid: a rush of excitement.
So many of the kids shows that I had been watching were awfully formulaic: identify problem in the beginning, set up a plan for fixing problem, follow through with plan, do dance at the end. And I understand that the task-based, problem-solving approach is de rigeur now in pedagogy, but sometimes it kinda feels like doing chores. Even the “unexpected” twists that the shows sometimes do feel just the opposite — planned. And the interactive element that is also such a prominent feature of pretty much everything that came after the success of “Blue’s Clues” also usually strikes me as hokey. Like Dora insisting that if you do an upwards motion with your hands, you’re actually “helping” her onscreen friend to climb a tree. Hokey and also a little……..misplaced and creepy? And you know what? Her onscreen friend always makes it up that tree even though my Little One doesn’t lift a finger. What sort of strangeness is being taught here? It’s OK not to respond when someone’s asking you for help, ’cause they’ll get by perfectly fine without it?
Despite the edgy underpinnings of Yo Gabba Gabba’s surface image, the values and skill set that it is promoting through its segments are just as basic and wholesome as any PBS show: Sharing, brushing your teeth, making new friends, being scared, taking naps, counting, loving your family and friends, being generous, caring for the earth, and above all…….playing and having fun. At its core, isn’t that what childhood should be about? (our next generation needs another My Baby can Read program like it needs a hole in the head). And the interactiveness that it aims for is a very old and organic formula: through guessing games, teaching new dance moves, encouraging kids to make a funny face. No voice-overs of kids shouting out answers to clueless characters necessary.
The celebrity cameos on YGG alone are worth tuning in for. Aside from the regulars Biz Markie and Mark Mothersbaugh of Devo, such diverse talents as Jack Black, Laila Ali (Laila freaking Ali!), Elijah Wood, Paul Williams, Andy Samberg, Jack McBrayer have graced the show, always at unexpected turns. That’s one of the main themes with YGG: you never really quite know what to expect. And that turns out to be really, really fun for everyone in our household. The Little One has embraced YGG into his daily life like no other show: He has his own set of ‘cool tricks’, does Biz’s beats, and often breaks out into song that he’s heard on the show. And he’s only two. Take that, My Baby Can Read. My baby can have great, goofy fun.
Wikipedia describes the coining of Yo Gabba Gabba’s title thusly: “Some claim the title of the series is derived from the chant “Gabba Gabba Hey“, first coined by punk rock band Ramones, but any similarities to the Ramones end at the title”. I, for one, disagree. The Ramones came to popularity in the late 70′s with a sound that took its cues from the fast tempo and edgy guitar sound of punk rock, but rose high above both punk and the bubblegum pop radio tunes of the era by delivering music that was basic and accessible and consistently jump-up-and-down fun. Much, I would argue, like Yo Gabba Gabba.
If you’re reading this, and you haven’t actually seen the show yet, I might suggest watching the following clip, which I believe is one of the best to sum up the overall mood of the show: The Aggrolites sing “Banana”. And even if you know the clip and you’ve seen it a hundred times already, go ahead and watch it again……you know you want to.
Yo Gabba Gabba is shown commercial-free on Nick Jr., currently in the noon and 12:30 time slots (cst).
My pick: The Best Little Highchair!
As a new mom-to-be, I was confounded by all of the choices among much of the baby furniture on the market, particularly the high chair. Not really knowing what features would actually help in making my and my child’s life a little easier, I was drawn by style alone. When it comes to furnishings, I’m a gal who dreams of George Nakashima and Hans Wegner, so in setting about shopping for kids furniture, I was drawn to the well crafted and beautiful, i.e. The Svan. Not quite being able to justify the high price tag, and dissuaded by the not-great reviews, I did not swing for it, nor did I put it (or any high chair) on my registry. I was happily surprised instead by the Graco Contempo Highchair
Then, when he was about 11 months old, we went on our first family vacation, and among the gear that I purchased for the trip was Phil & Ted’s MeToo! Travel Highchair
- it’s lightweight and folds flat, making it easy not only to pack in a suitcase, but it also fit in my diaper bag.
- it’s sturdy enough to easily hold a wriggly one year old.
- it’s quick to attach to a table; the clamp screws tight to many table widths and the rubber backing prevents damage to the table top.
- It sits him right up to the edge of the table, so he is close to eye level with any adults.
- It was great not just for eating at restaurants, but also in lounging — it can fit to most sturdy tables; not just dining, but also coffee tables, and most importantly, the counters affixed to the beach palapas.
We received so many positive remarks on the chair almost everywhere we used it…….”where did you get that”? “Where can I get one”? In fact, we liked it so well that as soon as we got home, this became our every day highchair. Because we used it so extensively for so long, I can also offer a few caveats: the Little One is very active, and by the time he got to be about 18 months or so, we had to move him out of the chair for daily use, and back to the Graco. His movements became such that he would actually loosen the clamps and move the chair little by little over a period of time. So though the weight restriction is 40 lbs as a travel chair, after about 25 pounds or so, I wouldn’t recommend it for everyday use with a wriggly kid. Also, the cleanability factor is not great — it can sponge clean OK, but in order to fully clean it, I would have to soak the entire chair, frame and all, in the kitchen sink.
Despite these couple of things, I cannot recommend the Me Too chair enough, especially for kids that can sit up fairly well, but aren’t quite running around yet. It gets them right up to the table and they can easily be part of the action while being securely fastened in. It’s the most versatile, and overall one of the best pieces of baby furniture that we invested in.
