I wrote early this year about my own experiences as a high school student in a magnet program established at a time when magnet programs were one tool in desegregating schools in the U.S. My experience was as a white student in a school where representation by ethnicity was carefully balanced, with no one group constituting more than about 20 percent of the student body. Now, a new study by sociologist Robert Crosnoe from the University of Texas at Austin suggests that there are
some hidden academic and psychological risks of integrating low-income students in schools with predominantly middle- and upper-class student populations.
This is the opposite situation, ethnically and racially speaking, from the one I experienced. Crosnoe's research discovered that
low-income students were more likely to be enrolled in lower-level math and science courses when they attended schools with mostly middle- and upper-class students, than in schools with low-income student bodies. For example, low-income students, on average, completed geometry by the end of high school when attending schools with predominantly poor or working class student bodies. Their comparable low-income counterparts in predominantly middle- or upper-class schools, however, tended to reach only as far as algebra I.
Likewise, low-income students who attended schools with wealthier student populations were more likely to feel isolated and have negative feelings about themselves. These results were even more pronounced for black and Hispanic students.
Crosnoe concludes that to sustain the initial academic achievement gains seen under socioeconomic desegregation, schools need to go beyond statistical integration to social integration of disadvantaged groups into the rest of the student body.
A similar question is being raised in South Carolina, where some people are concerned that Riverview Charter School in Beaufort County is "too white." In a district that is 45% white and 34% African American, Riverview finds itself in this situation:
Despite efforts to recruit applications from African-American students, fewer than 10% of the applicants for Riverview were African-American students and the selection lottery resulted in a proposed school enrollment that would be over 76% White and slightly less than 10% African-American students. If permitted to open as a racially identifiable White school, Riverview would violate the District's Desegregation Plan.
Meanwhile, a federal judge has released Chicago Public Schools from a federal desegregation decree. It's an interesting move that highlights some of the controversies in a district that has made the headlines this week for the bludgeoning death of Chicago teenager Derrion Albert at the hands of other teenagers. Specifically, the Albert tragedy has brought to light the closing of some Chicago schools and the subsequent reassignment of students to schools outside their neighborhoods. This shift has resulted in turf wars marked by fights similar to the one that killed Albert. The end of federally supervised desegregation efforts has put school programs such as busing, magnet programs, and bilingual education in limbo, and may mean fewer resources for schools in a district where resources are clearly insufficient:
Without the decree, CPS will no longer be compelled to target money to its 43 magnet and 23 selective schools. Those schools now get extra teachers paid for by the board, for specialty programs in areas such as language and fine arts. Further, the fate of the magnet cluster program is up in the air. That program, essentially a shadow of the full-fledged magnet school program, provides 229 neighborhood elementary schools with small grants that pay for extras in areas such as science and technology.
Some people are asking whether the end of the desegregation order means fewer black students will get admitted to Chicago's magnet and selective enrollment schools. These schools may resegregate if schools are allowed to rely on equal distribution of students based on socioeconomic status rather than race, said ACLU director Harvey Grossman, who pointed to school districts in San Francisco and Cambridge, Massachusetts as case studies in resegregation.
Meanwhile, further south, U.S. district judge Samuel H. Mays is overseeing a 46-year-old desegregation lawsuit in Jackson-Madison County in Tennessee. According to Tajuana Cheshier,
Mays granted the school system partial unitary status in August, noting that the system had made progress in removing racial disparities in the following monitored areas: faculty assignment, facilities, extra-curricular activities and transportation.
[...]
If Mays approves full unitary status, the lawsuit would end and the system would regain local control of faculty and staff assignment, extracurricular activities, facilities, transportation and student assignment.
In addition to desegregation efforts at 12 of the district's 14 elementary schools, at issue in the case are the differences between Madison Academic Magnet High School and JCM, another high school in the district; monitors are considering whether JCM offers inferior facilities when compared with Madison and other area high schools and whether JCM needs a new building to fulfill the terms of the desegregation agreement.
One of the trends pushing desegregation nationally is the desire of black and Latino families to move to the suburbs, while white families are relocating to cities. But there are similiarly forces pushing back against desegregation.
Michelle Goldberg writes at the American Prospect about the intertwining of conservative politics, a particular brand of Christian faith, and race. The photos accompanying her article--of Tea Party protesters—underscore the points she is making about race and desegregation. Specifically, she writes that the resurgence of Christian conservativism in the 1970s can be attributed to ongoing school desegregation:
The Columbia historian Randall Balmer has shown that Christian conservatives were not, contrary to their own mythology, initially mobilized by their outrage at Roe vs. Wade. Rather, what spurred them into action was the IRS's attempt to revoke the tax-exempt status of whites only Christian schools, schools that had been created specifically to evade desegregation.
Her photos in particular make me wonder about the thoughts of some of these protesters regarding ongoing desegregation efforts across the country.
The action, known as Massive Resistance, was supported and advocated by Sen. Harry Byrd Sr. in an attempt to block the 1954 U.S. Supreme County decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which called for the desegregation of all public schools as "inherently unequal." Virginia's then-governor James Lindsay Almond Jr. ordered the immediate closure of the schools in Charlottesville, Warren County High School in Front Royal and six schools in Norfolk.
Fifty years later, City Council is considering a formal apology for the closing of the schools and for the impact Massive Resistance had on city residents. A resolution, discussed by Council on September 21, calls the school closings "a disgraceful act," and praises the courage of the families of the 12 students who eventually integrated the city's school system.
What are your thoughts on race, schools, socioeconomics, and desegregation? What has been your experience? What troubles you, and what gives you reason to be optimistic?
When my daughter was an infant, I was terrified to leave her alone to sleep. I'd heard the stories, seen the warnings, read all the statistics: young babies sometimes die. In their sleep. Inexplicably. And no known means of prevention. Sure, you could make sure that their cribs were free of air-flow-hindering miscellany (bumpers, pillows, stuffed toys), you could put them on their backs to sleep, you could encourage them to take pacifiers, but end of the day, nobody really knew why some babies succumbed to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (even the name, which seemed expressly designed to terrorize new mothers, struck fear in my heart), and nobody knew how to prevent it.
They still don't.
I only know one woman personally who has lost a baby to SIDS. Loralee's description of the horror of her baby's sudden - sudden - and unexpected death is difficult reading (it breaks my heart into a zillion tiny pieces every time I read it), but it's important, because it's a stark reminder of how very, very important it is that we continue to press for a better understanding of SIDS, and that we continue to talk about it and stay aware of it and spread the word about anything, anything at all that might reduce risks, so that we can further reduce the number of babies - babies like Loralee's - who succumb to it every year. As Woman Tribune says, "people are working amazingly hard at reducing the number of babies who fall victim to SIDS every year; since 1992 when the Back To Sleep advisory was first introduced, the rate of SIDS has dropped more than 50% and has spared the lives of about 3,000 infants every year in the US."
But babies still die. Loralee's baby died. The babies of too many mothers - and fathers and sisters and brothers - have died. So we need to keep listening to their stories, and sharing their stories, and doing everything we can to support and promote awareness of SIDS.
It's SIDS Awareness Month. Talk to another mom about that. Talk to lots of moms about that. And then talk some more.
From Woman Tribune: steps parents can take to reduce their baby's risk.
* Place your baby on their back to sleep at night and naptime. * Use a firm mattress, covered with only a sheet, in a safety-approved crib. * Remove all soft and loose bedding from your baby's sleep area, including pillows, blankets, comforters, bumper pads, sheepskins, positioners, toys and all other soft objects. * Consider using a Halo SleepSack, a wearable blanket, or other type of sleeper as a safe alternative to loose blankets. * Do not place your baby to sleep on a sofa, waterbed, pillow, soft mattress or any other soft surface. * Keep your baby's face clear of coverings. * Be careful not to overheat your baby with excessive clothing, bedding or room temperature. * Do not smoke or allow anyone else to smoke around your baby. * Educate babysitters, day care providers, grandparents and anyone else who cares for your baby about reducing the risk of infant death.
Marked by bizarre hypotheticals, the Supreme Court struggled yesterday with a law banning videos depicting animal cruelty. At question is not animal cruelty itself (which is already illegal) but how the law might impinge on that most sacred of American rights: Free speech.
Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit cited freedom of speech and struck down the 1999 law which applied to illegal acts of torturing or killing animals. The law's aim was to eliminate the underground market in 'crush' videos which show small squealing animals, such as mice or kittens, being stomped by women in high heels. (Yet another sexual fetish I wish I'd never heard of.)
However, the law has been utilized recently in prosecuting people who sell videos of dog fighting, specifically Robert Stevens from Virginia - the case at hand in United States v. Stevens.
"It's not up to the government to tell us what are our worst instincts."
--Justice Antonin Scalia
Most of the justices seemed wary of reviving the law, fearing that it might be used against legal activities, such as hunting or fishing. Their remarks suggest that the disputed statute was too broad and dangerously vague for their comfort.
Justice Antonin Scalia wondered aloud whether the law would cover videos of bullfights while Justice John Paul Stevens asked whether images of animals hunted with bow and arrow might be covered.
"What is the difference between . . . bullfighting, cockfighting, dogfighting? You say dogfighting is included, but bullfighting? And I don't know where you put cockfighting."
--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
But the sound bite of the session undoubtedly came from Justice Samuel Alito who asked whether laws could target videos of Roman gladiators fighting to the death or even a "human sacrifice channel" on cable TV. (Sam obviously missed his calling as an innovative TV exec.)
"Live. Pay-per-view, you know, on the Human Sacrifice Channel. That's OK?"
--Justice Samuel Alito
To clarify: This case tests government's ability to ban images of abhorrent conduct with regards to animal cruelty, not the conduct itself.
"The fact conduct is repulsive or offensive does not mean we automatically ban the speech."
--Patricia Millett, lawyer for Robert Stevens, charged with selling dogfighting videos
Exceptions to the law are images with "artistic or social value" which, as Justice Stephen Breyer noted, is open-ended and ripe for endless debate. "People … have to know what to do to avoid being prosecuted," he said.
In fact, a jury rejected Robert Stevens' claim that his dogfighting videos had social value. He was convicted of selling depictions of animal cruelty and sentenced to 37 months in prison which he hasn't served a day of because of this appeal.
Chief Justice John Roberts brought up an important question. "How can you tell that these aren't political videos?" he asked, noting that PETA often uses pictures of animal abuse "to generate support for efforts to prohibit" such cruelty. While the law has not yet been used against videos with such political or social value, the justices clearly believe that stronger language is needed to clarify these exceptions.
A final decision on the case is not expected for at least several weeks so expect more sticky wrangling.
*** If you are a law nerd, enjoy fascinating analysis from the Supreme Court blog:
"Despite efforts by an Obama Administration lawyer to show that Congress wrote carefully and narrowly, most of the Justices strongly implied that the law probably goes too far — or at least was so vague that no one can know just what is illegal. Only one Justice, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., seemed tempted to support the law as is."
"Dissecting the law, which the Obama administration and 26 states support, the justices played verbal games, implying it could ban educational films about hunting or nature….The justices miss the point. To make these films, film-makers need 'actors' — animals who can't protest being thrust into dangerous or deadly situations."
Septimus at The Whig shares concerns with the Court and has a few hypotheticals of their own:
"Not to defend dog-fighting videos, but where do you draw the line? A few years ago, I watched a PETA video with actor James Cromwell that exposed animal cruelty at a pig farm. It had very graphic depictions of animal cruelty in an effort to change people's attitudes. Would such a video be prohibited under this statute? Who decides? The courts after a long and expensive legal battle? What about the show Animal Cops on Animal Planet? Again, it contains some upsetting depictions of cruelty."
Holly at Potomac Fever cautions anyone whose interest has been piqued by 'crush' videos:
"I warn you against googling them or attempting to find them as they are extremely offensive and upsetting to anyone who has even an ounce of sympathy for animals. If the Court overturns the decision and rules the law that bans this sort of material unconstitutional, then I'm afraid more of these types of things will surface.
We've heard the saying "if women were in charge of this it'd be so much better" and laughed it off as just our own gender bias speaking. Yet some recent studies show that there may be some fact to this statement. And, that is reason to give companies pause as they face an increased risk of these valuable women leaving their jobs.
Sylvia Ann Hewlett writes an excellent article called "Are Your Best Female Employees a Flight Risk?" at the Harvard Business Review. It seems women are more than twice as likely as men to be seriously thinking about jumping ship:
In researching my forthcoming book, Top Talent: Keeping Performance Up When Business Is Down, we found that in the wake of last year's financial crash, high-powered women were more than twice as likely as men — 84 percent compared with 40 percent — to be seriously thinking jumping ship. And when the head and heart are out the door, the rest of the body is sure to follow.
Women are falling victim to two types of attrition: they're being disproportionately let go and they're disproportionately quitting. Yet whether they're jumping or being pushed, figures show that a female exodus is bad for business.
We already know that women-owned businesses have been growing. In fact according to the SCORE Small Business statistics, "The number of women-owned firms continues to grow at twice the rate of all U.S. firms (23 percent vs. 9 percent). There are an estimated 10 million women-owned, privately-held U.S. businesses."
That's a lot and many of those talented women came from the ranks of companies large and small. Their departures can have real bottom line impact as well (and not on the upside). In the Harvard Business Review article, several studies are cited that drive home the facts that smart women equal stronger companies. You can read some of the studies for yourself at Catalyst, McKinsey, and Ceram. It's really great to see actual hard numbers associated with what many of us already knew intuitively: women having a place at the table makes for better business.
Women often need greater flexibility in the workplace, yet that same flexibility is being axed just as people need it most. This could account for one more reason why talented women decide they are not going to take it any more and become their own boss. In the New York Times Parenting Blogs, "Flexible Work in a Recession" throws some meat behind this hunch.
The American Society of Human Resource Managers found that while the number of companies offering things like flextime, part-time and telecommuting schedules had been increasing steadily leading up to the down-turn, the latest measure showed a drop of five percent.
A while ago I wrote a review on Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It and so many of these same annoyances may be the very tipping point that is showing itself now with the top talent exodus, particularly women. Attrition is poorly thought out and those left behind have had their chains pulled one time too many.
Sean Silverthorne gave his article a decidedly male spin in "Why Are Women So Unhappy At Work?" . I think the thoughtful question he poses at the end of his post along with the comments discussion are worth considering:
If you were creating a company from the ground up with an explicit goal of attracting, rewarding and best utilizing the talents of female employees, how would that company look different than today's traditional firm?
I think it is a good question because when we toss around generalities even with statistics attached, it doesn't do much to create a solution to the problem. Of course part of the challenge with designing a solution is that women don't have one general set of needs. As a group we're as diverse as they come. What is one woman's dream perk is another woman's nightmare. That being said, what is your take on this conversation? How would you answer this question? Love to hear what you have to say in the comments...
After reading Michael Pollan's book, The Omnivore's Dilemma and seeing the film, Food Inc., I added the task "Visit farms and ranches where my food comes from" to my ongoing, never-ending "To Do" list. And it sat there. And sat there. Until a couple of incidents spurred me to get serious. First, reading about the very sad fate of male chicks that I have been inadvertently contributing to even though I buy Certified Humane eggs and second, seeing how much fun Colin Beavan had visiting a local farm in the film No Impact Man.
How many of us really understand how our food is produced? Labels on meat and dairy products are full of pictures of happy animals in beautiful rustic settings with plenty of space to roam and be free. But is that the truth? And how can we make decisions about what food products are healthy, sustainable, and in line with our values if we don't have complete information and may not even know what our values are?
So yesterday, I rented a Zip Car and took a trip to Straus Family Creamery and organic dairy farm in Western Marin County to visit the cows that produce my milk and the humans who package and ship it to me.
The Straus family has owned and operated this dairy farm since 1941, and it became the first certified organic organic dairy west of the Mississippi River in 1994. In that year, Albert Straus opened the creamery, which produces milk, yogurt, butter, and probably the best ice cream EVER. But I had come to see the cows, find out how they are treated and learn how a dairy farm operates.
The first thing I noticed driving up to the farm were groups of cows hanging out and grazing in wide open spaces. What a beautiful place to live, whether you're a cow or a human, no?
In fact, these cows spend approximately nine months of the year outdoors, grazing and roaming. They eat the local grass, of course, but in this area, the grass is not sufficient year-round to support all the cows, so their diet is supplemented with mixtures of organic grains such as flax, oats, alfalfa, and yes... some corn. Contrary to Pollan's assertion that corn is no good for cows, Albert Straus believes that in moderation, it can be a healthy component of a balanced diet.
For Straus, the main trouble with corn is the fact that so much of it contains genetically modified organisms (GMOs). And while organic corn and grains of all kinds are not allowed to contain GMO's, there is actually no mechanism in place to test for them. So our organic foods may not be as GMO-free as we think. That's why Albert Straus took it upon himself to set up requirements for all his suppliers. They must test and ensure that the feed grains they supply are free of GMOs before they are delivered to Straus.
Straus's cows are milked three times per day, more often than the industry standard of twice a day. The extra milking allows Straus workers to handle the cows more often and notice any unhealthy signs sooner. Unfortunately, I didn't happen to arrive for milking time. I would have liked to have seen this operation in progress.
This lady is very, very pregnant. In fact, she's about 24-hours away from giving birth. And she's NOT in a good mood.
Across from the pregnant cows were hutches of baby cows. All the cows on Straus's farm are born and raised here. It is a closed herd... no outside animals are brought in. Sadly, the babies are removed from the mothers at birth and kept in individual pens separate from each other. They are bottle-fed by humans and never have a chance to suckle from their mothers. Why? So that each calf is ensured a standard diet without competition or possible contagion from others. It's a fact of life of the dairy business. Each of these calves takes nine months to gestate, just like human babies, and the dairy farmer wants to be certain that the investment will pay off and that the cows will be as physically healthy as possible.
What about the male calves? Some of them are kept on the farm for breeding purposes. Most, however, are auctioned off and will become meat. When asked if any of them will become veal, our guide Kristin told us that veal is not raised in this area and it would be very unlikely that a veal rancher would come all the way from the Central Valley to buy calves from Straus. And while many of the boys will will probably be bought by organic meat farmers, that is not guaranteed.
The males who are allowed to remain on the farm will spend their time hanging out with a group of females, called a "string," or perhaps a better term would be "harem." They breed the old fashioned way... 70% of the time. Artificial insemination is reserved for situations where in the old fashioned method doesn't work for some reason. Ideally, each cow will give birth once every 369 days.
The cows rest and find shelter in the barn, spending almost all of their time here during the winter months.
As you can see, they produce a lot of poop. In fact, each animal produces 120 pounds of solid and liquid waste per day! That is a lot of greenhouse gas-producing methane. Waste dropped in the fields is left as organic compost. But waste from the upper barn area has another purpose. Albert Straus has devised a method for capturing the methane from poop, keeping it out of the atmosphere and using it to power his farm. Each day, water is released from a silo, and powered by gravity, washes all that poop into a pond below.
The pond is covered with a tarp, which captures the methane gas and feeds it through a tube into a generator. The farm generates 90% of all it's electricity needs from cow poop. And the remaining solids are composted.
In fact, Straus seems to be doing everything it can to ensure that its business is environmentally sustainable. So what about the milk products themselves? All that packaging, for example...
As many in the Bay Area know, Straus bottles its milk in returnable glass bottles, charging a deposit which is refunded to the customer when the bottle is returned to the store.
Each bottle, whether new or returned, is run through the bottle washing machine. This machine, which originally used 12 gallons of water per minute, has been engineered so that it now only goes through one half gallon per minute. The cleaning solution is hydrogen peroxide, which breaks back down into water with no chemical by-products.
In fact, all the water at the Straus Creamery is recycled... whether the water for washing bottles or the water removed from the milk solids. Any leftover waste water that can't be recycled is delivered to the digester at the dairy farm to generate power.
But let's get back to packaging. The Straus bottle is glass. But the cap is non-recyclable plastic. And since some stores refuse to deal with taking back glass bottles, Straus also bottles some of its milk in plastic jugs. The company is working very hard to find plastic-free alternatives. The focus at the moment is on a compostable container made from recycled cardboard. Unfortunately, it will probably be lined with some kind of plastic, although that component is still in development.
Straus is not willing to line its containers with compostable corn-based plastic for the same reason that it rarely feeds corn to its animals -- GMOs. Since there is no guarantee that PLA or other corn-based resins are GMO-free, Straus is not willing to use that product.
The company is looking at a compostable alternative for its yogurt containers as well. For now, they are all plastic because the company does not have the resources or space to put in the facilities for returnable glass yogurt containers.
But here is what makes Straus plastic-packaged yogurt different from other yogurts packaged in plastic. The yogurt is vat set. Most yogurt companies add the hot milk and culture directly to each plastic yogurt container. And as many of us know, heat causes plastics to break down and leach whatever chemicals they might contain into our food. Straus sets its yogurt in a heated stainless steel vat. Once the yogurt reaches the correct PH, the vat is cooled down so that the yogurt is no longer hot when it's poured into plastic containers. This procedure helps prevent chemical leaching from the plastic, but it doesn't address the waste issue. So Straus continues to look for alternatives.
Of course, our favorite Straus product of all is the ice cream. Organic. Hormone-free. Delicious. But again, a lot of packaging, which, along with the high calorie content, is one reason I try to limit its presence in my house as much as possible.
So, what did I learn by visiting this farm? I learned that some businesses really are committed to sustainable agriculture and business practices but that we still have a way to go. I also learned that as well as the animals are treated, there will always be a limit to how much quality of life and freedom they can have. Business is business. This baby cow (below) grabbed my hand in its mouth and sucked and sucked. Was this because it craves what it can never have from its mother? I don't know. But I am glad to understand the reality of a cow's life on the farm and the true cost of the milk I drink. I will not spill it happily, and I might even cry over it a little bit.
Here are a few other women blogging about dairy farms:
If you're blogging professionally or even semi-seriously you've likely heard about the new FTC guidelines regarding bloggers and how we disclose any relationships with companies who have paid us to endorse or review products. As is usually the case when something changes, rumors and misinformation are swirling. This article seeks to give you a basic understanding of what's changing with the FTC regulations and how it may affect you as a blogger. I'll try to lay to rest the inaccurate rumors you may have heard.
What do the new FTC guidelines expect from bloggers?
The newest FTC guidelines require bloggers to disclose any relationship with an advertiser and to make "verifiable" claims. Relationships with advertisers include any compensation received in exchange for a review--including receiving a free product. As BlogHer.com's own Liz Gumbinner has said, "The intent of the FTC guidelines is to protect consumers from deceptive marketing practices."
Richard Cleland is Assistant Director of Advertising Practices at the FTC. He's been providing interviews around the country and clarifying the FTC's expectations for bloggers and disclosure. In a phone interview with Ed Champion of Reluctant Habits, Cleland told Champion that "the FTC's main criteria is the degree of relationship between the advertiser and the blogger. . .If there's an expectation that you're going to write a positive review, then there should be a disclosure."
However, the FTC does acknowledge that some cases are different from others. In an interview with Virginia Prescott at New Hampshire Public Radio, Cleland had this to say about receiving sampleproducts versus being paid for a review:
"That's going to depend on the circumstances. If we're talking about getting one free product or something sent to you and you happen to write about it on your blog, that's not the type of relationship that has to be disclosed. But if you're part of a network and you're consistently receiving products to test and blog about, then that raises the implication that these gifts are quid pro quo and that's why you're writing the positive reviews."
In answer to Ms. Prescott's question about how the FTC will hold bloggers accountable for false claims, Cleland said, "It's going to be on a case-by-case basis. It's going to have to be a situation where it's actually justified, the extent of the injury is such that it justifies using our resources to look at the possibility of an enforcement action."
It's worth noting that those of us with Amazon Affiliate links are expected to disclose those as well. Champion says Cleland "didn't see any particular problem with a book review appearing on a blog, but only if there wasn't a corresponding Amazon Affiliates link or an advertisement for the book." Though that example is specific to books, it could apply to any product linked to an affiliate.
Do the new guidelines include Facebook and Twitter?
Yes. Many bloggers type paid tweets and/or become Facebook fans of certain products, then share those tweets and fan pages with their friends. Just because the advertising relationship is outside a blog, it's still a relationship and the blogger is still compensated--the rule for disclosure and true testimonials applies. Caroline McCarthy at Cnet gives this example of how the FTC guidelines apply to a blogger (or, in this example, a celebrity) on Facebook:
"[A] celebrity or other prominent figure with loads of friends on Facebook receives free hotel stays from Hotel Chain X in exchange for running Hotel Chain X ads on his or her blog. If that person then signs up as a Facebook fan of Hotel Chain X--which, remember, could mean that the person's name can show up for his or her Facebook friends alongside Hotel Chain X display ads on the social network--he or she could be held liable by the FTC."
As for Twitter, the FTC expects you to fit in a disclosure regardless of the 140 character limit. Cleland told McCarthy, "There are ways to abbreviate a disclosure that fit within 140 characters. You may have to say a little bit of something else, but if you can't make the disclosure, you can't make the ad."
How can the FTC monitor every blog out there?
As Richard Cleland made the rounds of interviews, this question often came up. Cleland's answer was that the FTC's goal right now is to educate people on what is expected of them. He also indicated that the FTC would be "looking primarily at the advertisers to determine how the relationships exist" (from Ed Champion's interview).
In an article on CNN, Eric Kuhn reports that "Richard Cleland . . . admits there will be no new team to monitor all the blogs, and that enforcing these guidelines would be a 'game of whack-a-mole' given the numbers involved." Kuhn goes on to say that, "The new guidelines are viewed as more of an educational tool than any kind of requirement, and geared at advertisers more than bloggers. If numerous complaints are filed regarding a blog, the FTC is likely to investigate that the advertiser has properly advised the blogger of these guidelines."
In his interview with Caroline McCarthy at Cnet, Cleland said, "...in the bigger picture, we think that we have a reason to believe that if bloggers understand the circumstances under which a disclosure should be made, that they'll be able to make the disclosure. Right now we're trying to focus on education."
What about the $11,000 fine for bloggers who don't disclose payment?
Mashable.com, TechCrunch, CNN, and several other trusted news sources were reporting early Monday that bloggers who don't disclose payment will be fined $11,000 per violation. In fact, the updated FTC regulations (link downloads a pdf) don't mention an $11,000 fine at all. Eric Kuhn of CNN tweeted Monday night, "I just spoke with an FTC spokeswoman. She said there is NOT a $11,000 fine for breaking the new guidelines re endorsements." Unfortunately, none of the original articles with erroneous information have been updated to reflect that there is not currently a fine for violations.
Do I need to go back to my old posts and disclose for previous gifts or payments?
Lisa Stone, one of BlogHer.com's founders, gave this advice:
"Since we started this network in 2006, BlogHer's editorial guidelines have prohibited putting advertising in editorial space on blogs. So if you're talking about posts you've made on BlogHer.com or in your blog IF it's in the BlogHer publishing network, this question should not apply -- it's against the rules!
If you're not in the BlogHer Network, we recommend that you update your "About" page with your blog policy about payments and review your blog for the current year and disclose any gifts or payments. For previous years, I think you can disclose on your "About" page the date on which you began your disclosure practices. We are not your lawyer, but as a a general practice we recommend that bloggers disclose any kind of payment at the top of every post written because of a payment of cash, goods, or services."
Most of us are already doing the right thing and we're not who the FTC is after. To be sure you're in the know, download the current FTC guidelines. Then write up a disclosure policy and post it clearly on your blog. Not sure exactly how to write your policy? DisclosurePolicy.org can generate one for you.
Melanie Nelson writes tips and instructions for bloggers at Blogging Basics 101.
Pandas and polar bears are animal conservation's poster children for good reason. Here are 7 less cuddly endangered species that only a mother could love.
PlanetGreen.com offers practical, everyday tips on how to live a greener lifestyle. We offer actionable advice across a variety of topics: green made real.TreeHugger is the leading media outlet dedicated to driving sustainability mainstream. Partial to a modern aesthetic, we strive to be a one-stop shop for green news, solutions, and product information.
She a role model for autism parents struggling to balance advocacy with positivity and work with family, especially those who tirelessly investigate ways to help our children lead fulfilling lives, actively respect neurodiversity, and continue to educate ourselves and others about autism perspectives and attitudes.
Read on to learn about the founding and goals of the Autism Science Foundation, how "We [at The ASF] are really going to follow the science and not let the politics trump the science," why she thinks parents support questionable autism cures and causes, how her relationship with the Neurodiversity community has evolved, and what our primary message about autism should be.
SR: Why was the Autism Science Foundation (ASF) founded? What gaps will it fill?
AS: The Autism Science Foundation's mission is to support autism research by providing funding and other support to scientists and organizations conducting, facilitating, publicizing and disseminating autism research. We also provide information about autism to the general public and work hard to increase awareness of autism spectrum disorders and the needs of individuals and families affected by autism.
ASF adheres to rigorous scientific standards. We believe that outstanding research is the greatest gift we can offer our families. Every research dollar needs to count. We are thrilled that after only five months of operations we have already released our first request for scientific grant proposals. Our first round of grants will support graduate and medical students interested in pursuing careers in basic and clinical scientific research relevant to autism spectrum disorders. The grants will provide funding for them to begin their research and thus their careers in this field. This is really a critical part of the process. Just last week at the IACC (Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee) Scientific Workshops the concept of recruiting young, energetic scientists with new ideas into the field was highlighted as a critical priority.
SR: How will the ASF efforts differ from those of organizations like the Boston Autism Consortium or the M.I.N.D. Institute?
AS: ASF is committed to supporting outstanding science and scientists but we don't do research ourselves. We have great respect for the work being done at the MIND Institute, by the Boston Autism Consortium and by other centers and universities across the country and around the world. As a public charity, our focus is on raising money from the public to support the type of work being done by these groups and other groups that are taking a scientific approach to understanding what causes autism and to developing new treatments for kids, teens, adults, and senior citizens. Raising money is not easy, especially in the current economic climate. Our families are often tapped out because they have huge expenses for therapy that are not covered by insurance. Our goal is to broaden the base of donors so that we are able to provide more funds to scientists and support their research efforts.
That said, the response from the parent community has been extremely supportive. The response from the scientific community has also been very supportive. People are just very enthusiastic about the idea that we are really going to follow the science and not let the politics trump the science.
ASF is also very committed to sharing and disseminating information about autism research and treatments. Our website has a very popular "Autism Headlines" section where we post the latest news about autism research. Our "Autism Science" section publishes links to the latest studies and provides commentary and analysis from the investigators themselves. We also run a bi-monthly program called "Science and Sandwiches" that brings scientists and family members together to talk about research. These have been great opportunities for information to flow in both directions. It's critical for scientists to hear from families as well as for families to understand the latest research discoveries. The information that scientists glean can't help families if families don't know about it.
SR: Does the ASF plan to support research into the heterogeneity of autism, i.e., on whether individuals at opposite ends of the autism spectrum should be given the same label?
AS: In our current RFA (request for applications) we are inviting applications in all areas of related basic and clinical research. We are particularly interested in human behavior across the lifespan, which would include language, learning, communication, social function, epilepsy, sleep, repetitive disorders and caregiving. Caregiving is a critical area for us to understand better. We know our families are highly stressed and we need to find betters way to understand how we can support families so that they can support their members with disabilities. We are also interested in neurobiology (anatomy, development, neuroimaging), neuropathology, human genetics/genomics, pharmacology, immunology, molecular and cellular mechanisms, and studies employing model organisms and systems.
SR: Autism research funding is sometimes criticized for helping future generations at the expense of existing in-need children and adults, like your daughter and my son. Will the ASF be putting energies into community support, outreach, or education?
AS: Our focus is on research and on research dissemination. There are lots of groups that do wonderful work in community support, education, and lobbying and we will work with them to help support their efforts whenever we can by partnering in local events. But the focus of our organization will be on raising the funds necessary to make meaningful advances in research.
SR: The Neurodiversity community has been critical of both the ASF and your own diplomacy efforts. What concerns have they voiced to you?
I have spent a lot of time in the last year or so speaking with members of the neurodiversity community and have learned a lot from these conversations. These relationships have been very productive for me, and I have a much better of sense of the issues now. I have changed my behavior and rhetoric in response to some of the very good points people have made, and continue to speak frequently with many of the leaders of the neurodiversity community. There is still one big issue, however, on which we disagree. I do still feel that genetics research is the best chance we have for understanding the mechanism of action of autism and creating targeted therapeutics. Genetics research is not about creating a prenatal test and eliminating people with autism from the planet. It's about understanding the pathways that cause the most disabling symptoms of autism and figuring out how to develop treatments that provide relief from these debilitating symptoms [emphasis mine SR]. Our belief in the importance of genetics research in no way detracts from our eagerness to support research into supports and services and expansion of funding for this critical area. I have been extremely vocal on that issue at the IACC meetings.
I also think a lot of these issues stem from the heterogeneity of the autism diagnosis. I truly pray for the day to come when my daughter can blog or self advocate. She and so many kids like her still have a long way to go in overcoming significant cognitive and behavioral challenges. I realize that concepts like self determination are important for certain individuals with autism, but right now in our family we are still working on preventing our daughter from banging her head against the wall and hurting herself, or running out of the house into traffic and getting run over by a car. Issues like preventing pain and protecting safety are still front and center for many of our families.
SR: Why do you think scientifically refuted claims of autism causes (vaccinations) and cures (chelation, etc.) find such a wide audience?
I think it's because parents love their children so much. It's very hard to accept that your child is going to struggle and have these tremendous challenges. It's natural to want to blame someone or something. Believe me, I've been there. But parents need to look at the data. You can't be so focused on anger that you lose sight of what the science is saying because that's really not in the best interest of the kids. I would encourage parents to look at the science and make decisions based on the science. And the science is clear in the case of vaccines and autism. Vaccines don't cause autism. I think families were right to ask that the vaccine studies be done in the late '90s and the early part of this decade, but our public health community really responded to that. And we now have dozens of studies looking at vaccines and vaccine components, all of which have yielded the same answer that, no, vaccines do not cause autism. I think we owe it to our families, we owe it to people with autism, to fund studies that are likely to yield new information. If you keep asking the same question, you're going to get the same answer. We have to ask new questions and try to find out what really is causing autism.
It also scares me to see children with autism being put at risk by therapies that have no evidence of efficacy and can do real harm, especially when they divert time and energy away from proven therapies like Applied Behavior Analysis. One thing I find so interesting in our community is the huge placebo effect in so many treatment clinical trials. Parents say the kids are benefiting from treatment, but often the parents of the kids on placebo report even better outcomes. Again, I think this is because we love our kids so much and want them to improve. But this is why it's important to have rigorous, double blind, placebo controlled testing of various interventions.
SR: If you could communicate one message about autism to those outside our community, what would it be?
AS: The message I constantly try to communicate is that our family members can learn and improve. They can make meaningful progress at all ages. The learning window does not magically close at age 5, 13, or 21. My brother with autism, for example, wasn't toilet trained until he was in his thirties but now is able to participate in a program delivering Meals on Wheels to homebound senior citizens. He is a contributing member of our community, but he wouldn't have had that opportunity if we had given up on teaching him new skills. Likewise, my daughter Jodie is doing things now that we never would have expected. It has taken 6 years to teach her to ride a bike, but she's almost there. Jodie has benefited tremendously from applied behavioral analysis therapy. She has learned to have some actual functional, communicative speech. She's able to make her wants and needs known. That's really a breakthrough. And as her speech has improved, so have some of her most difficult behaviors. We owe so much to the amazing teachers and therapists who work with her.
-----
Those who need resolution regarding Alison Singer's statement in the 2006 Autism Every Day video, in which she "contemplated driving off the George Washington Bridge rather than put my daughter in a school for kids with autism," should read Ms. Singer's own thoughts on the matter. It is my hope that we can listen to and take action what she has to say now, and move forward, rather than clinging to old resentments which in no way benefit our children, peers, or families.
-----
To see how Shannon Des Roches Rosa's attitudes about autism have changed over the past six years, sift through the 2,000 blog posts at www.Squidalicious.com. To see how she supports and advocates for local families of children with special needs, visit The Can I Sit With You? project.
As the seasons begin to shift toward autumn, I starting more about giving -and especially charitable giving. Money for food banks for holiday meals, home-made biscuits for the animal shelters, and crafts for whichever charities can use them. Sewing, quilting, crochet, and knitting are the key crafts where charitable appeals are aimed.
With limited time, what are some of the charities that looking for charitable crafting?
Softies for Mirabel is an Australian crafting appeal to collect as many softies as they can before December 10th to donate to the Mirabel Foundation- an organization which assists children left without parents due to parental illicit drug use and are now being cared for by extended family. The toy collection is organized by Meet Me At Mike's. You can see some of the softies already donated by checking the Flickr Group.
Need inspiration for a softie to construct? Jodie at RicRac designed these adorable softies- one which reminds me a lot of a nutcracker toy soldier- in less than an hour. She offers the toy soldier pattern as a PDF download at Scribd.
Additionally, One Red Robin's Jhoanna MonteAranez made up an adorable Oh-Oh the Owl Softie and offers the pattern for free so you can make up a couple for toy give-aways.
Can you make a square?
Around the world from the Australian Toy drive, is Knit a Square to be used for AIDS orphans in Africa. Sandy Zanny's aunt lives in Africa and works with the Soweto Comfort Club to "collect, sort, bundle and join the squares into blankets and then distribute them to groups of children, greatly in need." If you take the short time to sort through your remnant yarn from completed projects -you can quickly knit or crochet an 8" square and mail it off. Heck, mail off a few.
These women are assembling the squares they receive into comforting blankets, hats, and overvests to give the children orphaned to AIDS. With a goal of 5000 blankets this year-this group needs donations of nearly 138,000 squares. Can you spare one evening or weekend of crafting to help? All the information you need can be found at the website. Quilting and Sewing for a Cause Charitable crafting takes place in the US, too. CraftSanity's Jennifer Ackerman-Haywood recently pointed out Margaret's Hope Chest, a Michigan-based charity that aims to make and distribute 400 quilts to homeless children living in shelters over this Christmas holiday. And CRAFT HOPE has taken on crafting projects of all kinds. Their latest was to donate 225 sock monkeys to a Preschool Burn Camp. Each and every sock monkey is unique!
Ofcourse one of the long-running charitable craft projects is Project Linus.
Project Linus is comprised of hundreds of local chapters and thousands of volunteers across the United States. Each volunteer and local chapter all work together to help us achieve our mission statement, which states:
First, it is our mission to provide love, a sense of security, warmth and comfort to children who are seriously ill, traumatized, or otherwise in need through the gifts of new, handmade blankets and afghans, lovingly created by volunteer "blanketeers."
Second, it is our mission to provide a rewarding and fun service opportunity for interested individuals and groups in local communities, for the benefit of children.
Together we have distributed over three million blankets to children in need since our inception in 1995.
But perhaps you are moving on from one crafting adventure to another, or simply cleaning house and willing to give some of your stash to others to use in charitable crafting. Crafting a Green World wrote a great list of suggestions on places to donate craft supplies for charity. Check it out.
We've still got three weeks and change until Halloween, a holiday that doesn't really creep up so much as start appearing in August. The big-box stores started opening before Labor Day, there are pumpkins crowding around outside the supermarkets and popping up in abandoned lot pumpkin patches, and the corn mazes are standing tall.
But still, I know I've found myself in two situations in the past couple of years. One, standing in one of those big box Halloween stores on October 29th, staring at a gutted wall and trying to be helpful with costume suggestions from the dregs ("You could... buy the Franciscan monk robe and be a Jedi? You already have a lightsaber..."). Two, ordering a costume piece online... and the Post Service loses/delays it until October 29th, forcing me to make panicked calls to the postmaster and take a sharp look at my closet to see if there's anything I can pull for a last-minute costume.
Of course, it doesn't always have to be last minute -- Jennine of The Coveted did a recurring series last year called Halloween in My Closet, where she pulled items from her closet and turned them into cute and stylish Halloween costumes. She's doing it again this year, and is taking suggestions for this year's go-round!
But even if you don't have crinolines or fancy hats in your closet, there are certainly costumes that can be pulled together with either what you have or a quick trip to a thrift store or standard clothing store!
- One of my "what if my costume doesn't arrive??" last minute ideas last year was a MAC Cosmetics girl -- dressed all in black with silver jewelry, a brush belt, and some wickedly intense eyeshadow. I don't think I'm the only one who has a whole bunch of vivid eyeshadows that I don't really wear, so it would be a good way to get that bright teal shadow out of the drawer!
- A little black dress with different accessories can easily turn into Holly Golightly (black gloves, tiara, orange stuffed cat if you like), a Sterling Cooper secretary (cardigan, neck scarf with brooch, notepad), or a femme fatale (backseamed stockings, smoky eye and red lip). It's all in how you wear it!
- Speaking of little dresses, one of my favorite costume ideas is "Devil With the Blue Dress" -- all you need is a blue dress and devil horns.
- Love 'em or hate 'em, American Apparel usually has a decent Halloween costume suggestion section on their website -- one year they showed how to create the whole Scooby Doo gang with AA pieces. But apparently I'm too early for them -- they say it's "coming soon" as of today. Of course, a lot of their clothing is, uh, a touch on the hard-to-wear side (to put it quite nicely) and can be pricy, but it's a good way to get some inspiration.
Have you ever found yourself in the "I need a costume and have no time to get to the store" situation? What are some of your favorite costumes from the past? Have you already decided what you're going to be this year?
When it comes to Anita Tedaldi's story of placing her adopted son with another family, I am torn. I want to be angry. I want to be compassionate. The two sides of myself argue with one another until I find myself tossing both sides to the wind as I remember what is at the core of this story: the child.
As a mother who searched high and low to find the best possible parents for my firstborn child, I can't imagine how I would have felt had her Mom decided she wasn't bonding and placed her with another family. While I understand that the adoption in this particular case was not a domestic infant adoption, I can't remove the birth mother from an adoption story. We don't know her story, whether she was still alive or if she believed that her child would be cared for by one family. She may not know that her child has been passed around like an object but my heart still breaks and seethes for her, whatever her story. I have had to accept an additional caregiver as my daughter's parents divorced and her Mom remarried. While not the same as shuffling her around from family to family, it was a mental challenge to accept. I am lucky in the fact that I am able to see my daughter grow and adjust to life with a (wonderful) stepfather. How might this birth mother feel when and if she learns of the disruption and re-adoption, years down the line?
Still, as a birth mother, I want to feel that compassion. I wasn't always offered that compassion, having been villainized and shunned by much of society as a woman who didn't love her child enough. (Their words, not mine.) I've been in the worst place a mother can find herself: uncertain of whether or not she can provide the best life for her child. Due to health and financial issues, I felt as though I couldn't provide for my child. On that level, I understand what Tedaldi experienced. In fact, she one-upped me in that she sought out counseling. The agency through which I placed didn't offer such a thing. I want to believe that the counselor that she worked with helped her weigh the pros and the cons, better than her agency did prior to the adoption. Furthermore, while I don't agree that her being lauded as a hero on blogs and on television shows is particularly on the mark, I do find this quote from a the Motherlode blog brings up a good point.
While rare, failure to bond does happen (in some adoptions, as in some biological births), and to pretend otherwise is to do a disservice to both children and parents. Anita was not prepared for what she faced. The agency who screened her should probably have rejected her. Exploring those things is part of exploring adoption.
Similar to the life I seem to be accidentally living, her story is one that, hopefully, is educating people. I don't see her as a hero. I am not going to give her a big award for what she has done. I do hope, however, that society is learning something by hearing her story.
Adoption is not butterflies and rainbows. Agencies are dropping balls. Reform is needed.
In the end, my anger and compassion conflict don't matter as much as the child in question. I am hopeful that he is now with a family that will love him even when he secludes himself in his room as a teenager, his iPod turned too loud to hear the requests that he join them for dinner. I am hopeful that he has found a family who believes that when the tough gets going, you go with it. I am hopeful that he is with a family who understands that the love for a child needs to be unconditional, maybe more so when the child has had a rocky, tumultuous start in life. I am hopeful that he is with a family who, when he asks them questions about his first family and the adoptive mother who gave him away, understands the delicate balance of truth, age appropriate information and reminders that he is with a family that would move mountains to support his journey to find himself, whoever he might be. I am hopeful that, whatever our feelings toward Tedaldi, we can all agree that this child needs no more emotional turmoil; he needs a forever family. I hope he's found it.
My grandfather made the best chocolate chip cookies I've ever had. I am a cookie freak in a family of cookie freaks and they are my seminal cookie, the cookie to dominate all other undeserving cookies in the world. I can still see them stacked in careful waxed paper layers in the tins, perfect chip-to-dough ratio, just a bit harder than your average chocolate chip cookie, lovely and bumpy and exactly perfect mix of sugar and salt.
He also made one of the most horrible concoctions I have ever smelled and never ate, something he called Ringtumdiddy that involved cheese and tomato soup (and apparently a little bit of beer) that I could smell through the door to the point of dry heaves when I came home from school on the days that he made it. You know, just in case I give the impression that everything he made was awesome.
He left no specific recipe for either. I think he might have used the Tollhouse one on the back of the yellow chocolate chip bag, in fact, but I can tell you for sure that the times I've tried to duplicate it in years past have resulted in cookies that taste nothing at all like his. This could be because while I can cook fairly well, baking has always eluded me. I think that baking - and by that I mean baking well - is difficult. It requires specificity and attention to detail that I lack, and that my grandfather mastered. I can bake a pie and it tastes good but the apples turn out just a little too oozy. I could tell you the one about the exploding bread machine but just in case you have no IDEA how big dough can get, the answer is big, quickly, very big dough, exploding from machine. My brownies are decent but to borrow and slightly alter a catchphrase, even bad brownies are good brownies. Failed hunks of warm chocolate? Right, that's a problem.
When I read Angela at Disnazzio's wonderful reflection on making soup that - while modeled after her father's and her grandmother's - became her own, I cried both because I am a sap who cries at things and also because I related on such a very specific level to several pieces of the story. One, I currently lack my own dedicated cooking space in which to even try to fail at baking, (long story) and two, there is something about the season changing solidly into fall that brings food and my family much more strongly into view. Fundamentally I am a warm weather creature and the SAD, it can get to me early, so the temperature dropping and the light changing send me diving for cover and for comfort. The accompanying drumbeat of the approaching holidays seals the deal. There will be Christmas cookies, for sure, but they will not be that cookie.
I can therefore take a page from Angela's cookbook and buck up:
And then I thought about my dad, how he started cooking food to feed a family when he was not much older than HALF as old as I am now; he was a boy. And how he, and my Nonnie, and his own Nonnie (my, uh… Nonnie Emeritus?) all, I know now the way you know these things as you grow into yourself and your family, have the same fears and anxieties and need for perfection that I do. But at some point, each one in turn lit the stove and hoped for the best. And so I did, with – seriously – a lump in my throat from the anxiety.
She writes about this soup as a rite of passage, a claiming of a space in the family line that, while not exactly like the food of the very loved people who came before, is hers and that alone means more than enough.
I can see that too. Our lives as we live them are not like those of our loved ones who in some cases, like mine, are no longer living. We have different ovens - and in the case of cookies, I believe that the oven is the thing, really - in different kitchens in entirely different worlds. Given the epic symbolism of food and and family and feeding to love far beyond survival, this text box will not hold what a shortish Navy veteran standing at a counter in clashing plaids mixing dough and drinking beer while watching a black and white movie out of his peripheral vision meant to me. When I think about it on the surface, I want the cookie back. As I write this I know what I want to see and have is him making them for me, stacking them in the tins, so much more than I care to duplicate his recipe.
I would even take him if it meant Ringtumdiddy every day, but we would still have to negotiate the Scrapple.
I won't get that, of course, so we make do. My sister is a great chef and a better-than-average baker too, who is studying food traditions as an academic and understands probably even more deeply than I do how important and ingrained they are. I can hold my own in certain kitchen quarters and can kind of fake his whiskey sour. My father doesn't cook often but when he does it's with the same attention to detail and generally delicious results. Just months after my grandmother died, our family vacationed together this summer - my grandparents' four sons, their wives, my generation of seven grandchildren and assorted significant others and now three great-grandchildren that he would be totally thrilled to meet. Most nights we made dinner in some collective fashion, which regardless of what goes on the table is the key that week. One day my godson, his youngest grandson, went up and made sandwiches and brought them down to us on the beach. He was born just months after my grandfather died and had no idea that this was his daily beach routine for years, and my heart exploded to the point that I didn't try to explain.
When we're together talking and eating, my grandparents come up a lot. More often than not there are Ringtumdiddy jokes, which I would detail but they would not be at all funny. Not only would you have to be there, you'd have to be us. Chances are you have your "you" with its own jokes that would go right over my head too.
I might try the cookies again, someday, when I'm settled, although my sister has them covered and I can invite myself over to "help" when the December baking days roll around. She is also engaged to a man who makes me a peanut butter mocha cake from scratch for my birthday because he is nice and comes from an Italian family who bake together, so I might do just as well to focus on the whiskey sours. My mom has the barbecue and stuffed pepper recipes he actually did write down, splattered with ancient sauce stains, which are probably better for me given my greater talent for main dishes and adjustable spice situations. And thanks to Google, I might even try to see if Ringtumdiddy tastes as bad as I remember it smelled. Maybe.
Angela writes:
The soup did not taste like my dad's. It certainly did not taste like my Nonnie's, which is the soup of all soups, and I almost don't want to precisely recreate that one, because I feel about it almost the way I feel about the ocean (yeah, it IS that good). It didn't even taste the way I wanted it to (which was mildly irritating since for most of the afternoon, it smelled exactly the way I wanted it to taste). Next time I will throw in a little more of this and maybe a little less of that, and leave it simmering a little longer. But what matters to me today is that I want to do it again. I didn't get it exactly right, and that's okay. It's actually kind of exciting. It means that I couldn't write it down for you, and I would have to, just as my dad has driven me mad for years by doing, walk someone through it, with instructions like "a little of" and "for a while," and I would have to trust you to figure it out.
I miss him. I miss his cookies. I think he trusted me to figure it out, to try again until the dough doesn't explode. Somehow it all fits.
Other voices around the Web:
TW's read Love Song in a Foreign Language from Retro Food as part of the BlogHer 2009 community keynote this year and I think I was crying by the third paragraph although I wasn't sure why. Then she got here and I knew:
But listen to the tune…you know this love song. This is the dinner made for a mother with a newborn. This is the cake made to celebrate a son's birthday…his favorite. These are the pork chops and potato pancakes counted on to bring a smile to her father-in-law's face. These cookies sing holiday tunes with Mama in the kitchen with excited children. She tucks these memories away as she tucks the cookies in tins to give to her friends.
We spend a lot of time with people the age of our children. It's the way our community developed; we all moved up here at the same time (to an old, awakening neighborhood) and became close long before any "age mates" came to town. And those friendships continue. Recently though, there have been some bumps. I realized that one reason is that younger people have fewer years of experience (obviously, duh!) And there are things that it takes time to learn. Realizing that after five years, I wondered how others feel about the same sorts of situation. I also wanted to remind myself that friendships emerge in all sorts of ways. And of course, I found plenty of posts -- and most of them are pretty encouraging.
My special friend whom I met whilst very poorly in hospital. Despite our pain and the age gap - she is in her 80's - we had so much fun. It HURT to laugh, but we managed it!!;
At the HR Ringleader's Blog, Tricia looks the age gap at work and all the hullaballoo that's been written about it, and compares it to social media relationships, where age never matters.
One thing that occurred to me recently was that when I meet people via social media outlets, I never even think about their age. I have older friends, younger friends, and age is not an issue.
They all bear out my experience. Despite the "bumps" it's possible - and often lovely - to have friends far younger or older than you are. Like most wonderful things, all it requires is a sense of adventure and an open heart.
If in our daily life we can smile, if we can be peaceful and happy, not only we, but everyone will profit from it. This is the most basic kind of peace work. --Thich Nhat Hanh
This quote by the Buddhist monk, Thich Nhat Hanh, really touched me. I found myself coming back to it over and again this week.
It all started last Saturday when I drove by a group of peace activists standing in the rain outside the farmer's market in Greenfield, Massachusetts. They held signs and just stood quietly, a silent witness to their longing for peace. Many of them were my age -- they'd "been there, done that" before during the Vietnam war - and here they/we are again.
One of the signs said "Make Peace".
The war has been troubling me again. War troubles me. The feeling of helplessness I have in the face of it troubles me. So I vote in a particular way, and send money to causes that believe as I do, nd write letters to decision-makers. And I pray. But I am nagged by the feeling that it isn't enough. How do *I* "make peace"?
And then along comes Thich Naht Hanh and he tells me to find my peace, my personal peace -- and that finding it will be an important part of peace work. And, I think he is right. Unless my heart and soul are at peace, I cannot think or see clearly. I can be of less meaningful help.
Then I thought of a hymn I recall singing:
Let there be peace on earth And let it begin with me
Imagine if we all did that -- all found the place and circumstance that gave us the most personal peace, and we created that place for ourselves as often as possible. It is something we can do in the odd moments, in the seams of the day.
If we focus on it in meditation, we can even have it when we are not there. If, for example, you are at your most peaceful when at the ocean, meditating about the ocean, and remembering the peace you felt, can bring that peace back to you. You can find the rhythm and let it flow through you again.
Or maybe, that peace can come by us making room for it to arrive more often. If you are most at peace while writing -- why not write more?
Being at peace with ourselves quiets the clatter that keeps us from being in the world in a peaceful way. It helps us know what to do next, and gives rise to acts of kindness.
Being at peace, real peace, shuts out those feelings that get us and the world in trouble.
Think about it this week. Here are some bloggers who talk about what makes them "most at peace".
Mothermari recalls time with her Grandmother as times of deepest peace.
Grandmother Leah (or Lee as everyone called her) was a wonderful cook. She was the master of fried chicken, and the wizard of cherry pie. Each presented to me every year as one of her gifts to me on my birthday. She would begin early in the morning preparing the birthday feast by wearing her best appron that always had tucked inside one of the pockets a dainty handkerchief. She seemed to moved around the kitchen effortlessly as she prepared each dish. The smells of the birthday treat would drift through the house as she started cooking.
BonnieRose speaks of the serenely quiet moments in her search for moments of peace.
I crave the quiet, the prayer times, the meditation, the stillness of just being alone with myself. It is during these times when I am the most -- at peace.
I've always believed that each person has a certain place in the world where their heart feels most at home. The world could be falling down around you and you wouldn't even notice. There's a comfort when you walk on certain territory, just knowing that there's nowhere on this earth that God wants you to be rather than where you are at that moment. Right in the midst of poverty and lost people and orphans and street boys and a language that I can't wrap my mind around for the life of me…this is my heart's home: Ethiopia. This is where I feel most at peace…but at the same time, I'm still unsettled.
I am most at peace when I am stitching, listening to good music, with my faithful little companion at my feet. No matter what is going on in my life, stitching makes me feel much more calm and peaceful. The stress and cares of the day just melt away.
Angela decided on med school vs law school based on which one made her feel the most at peace when she thought about it.
I've found that I feel most at peace when I'm near the ocean. Something about the ebb and flow, the constant cycle of its soothing sound. The feel of the sand, shifting under my bare feet. I also feel the most bliss when I'm warm. I've visited cold states and countries and have discovered that cold weather makes me tense and irritable---and only a half step away from homicidal.
In a world so obsessed by the large scale gesture, it seems almost foolish to suggest that something I do or you do can change the world. But if *we* do it, then maybe it can.
We mirror to the outside world, reflecting outward what is happening in our inside world. We impact the world of people in our lives based on what is happening inside us. Everyone we touch in a day, a week, a year, is affected in some way by whether or not we are at peace.
Maybe it is a memory of a beloved relative, or the call of meaningful work in Ethiopia, or the sea, or writing or stitching or any number of things that brings you real peace. Get quiet enough to think about that -- where or under what circumstances are you most at peace? Try imagining how you might bring more of that into your life this week. It will energize you, fulfill you, and will improve the world, one person at a time.
Her nomination to the Court may have been controversial (at least at first, until nearly everyone realized that not only was she qualified, but she was replacing, of all people, David Souter), but brand new Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is not allowing that to hamper her first week on the bench. Instead, she's proving that she was born for her job.
By mid-morning on the first day of the Supreme Court's term, it was clear new Justice Sonia Sotomayor would fit right in -- and in particular with her talkative fellow New Yorkers.
Sotomayor peppered the lawyers with questions in a pair of cases, joining with Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg during the oral arguments. Together, they left the other justices sitting in silence for much of the time.
In the first hour alone, Sotomayor asked 36 questions, and Scalia followed with 30. Ginsburg is particularly interested in legal procedures, and she and Sotomayor dominated the questioning for much of the second hour.
Consinder me impressed. Most of the time, the newbie on the bench sits back and watches as the more experienced and inevitably older (WAY older in some cases) Justices handle the questions for the first few cases. Instead, Justice Sotomayor took the opportunity to delve right in, questioning the Maryland Attorny General on his appeal from the Maryland Supreme Court in a case involving the Miranda warning. Surprisingly, the LA Times compared her apparent position to that of Scalia's.
Maybe we're all in for a surprise. After all, as Kate Klonick of Full Court Press points out, we're only now, after her hearings, starting to get a feel for what Justice Sotomayor is really like.
She was obviously brilliant, well-reasoned and incredibly articulate — but beyond the occasional references to her Bronx upbringing and love of baseball, her personality seemed mostly under wraps.That was different from Chief Justice John Robert's hearings, where he charmed the Senate Judiciary Committee, and more recently, Solicitor General Elena Kagan's confirmation where she even got Sen. Arlen Specter to chuckle. Sotomayor seemed sterile in the week of hearings, probably in large part due to the fact that her identity with her race and culture (the infamous "wise Latina" remarks) would come part and parcel with any openness.
But finally, we're getting a glimpse into Sotomayor, Human Being, and what we're seeing is very likeable.
There will be plenty of opportunities over the coming months to see the Real Sonia Sotomayor, both as a person and as a judge, as she navigates one of the most exciting "seasons" the Supreme Court has seen in recent years. Colleen from News in Politics points out that cases up for consideration this year span nearly every ideological contention this country can produce.
The important issues that the justices will have to face over the coming months involve weapon restriction and gun rights, the display of religious symbols on public property, the verdict for juvenile criminals committing non-homicidal offences, and international child abductions and parent custody thereof. Other cases include government takings, civil commitment for sex offenders, dog fighting, Miranda rights and terrorism.
Of course, through all of this, I and, really everyone, will be watching Sonia Sotomayor more closely than we typically watch for the results of reality television finales. Latoya Peterson of Jezebel points out that court handicappers will be analyzing everything about Justice Sotomayor right down to her facial expressions and the style of her robe to try to come up with some sign of how she will rule. Will she make Obama proud and become the Justice Scalia of the left side of the court? Or will she return to her history (she was originally nominated by a Republican and was once suggested as a nominee to President George W. Bush) and shock everyone by joining up with the courts conservatives? Or will she take after her predecessor David Souter and only be noticed as a Justice when something really weird happens, like property rights advocates try to take her house in an Eminent Domain related publicity stunt?
It all remains to be seen. Even Sandra Day O'Connor, who was interviewed by USA Today, seems to have no idea how this will all turn out. And not just the ideological position of the courts most recent addition. Justice Stevens, who is rapidly approaching 90 years old, is still not entirely sure where he left his car in the Supreme Court parking lot.
BlogHer is nonpartisan and even though I kind of was this week, generally as a Contributing Editor, I am not. See my contributions to the disintigration of partisan discourse at American Princess.
I'm not sure I'd bill the 3rd week of competition (out of about 10 more to go) the sexiest it's gonna get. But hey, they've been doing this a while, maybe they know something I don't?
So yes, it was Latin Week at Dancing with the Stars, and couples were going to have to tackle the the romantic, sensual Rumba or the sexy, sizzling Samba. Whether they have to get their hips moving slow and sensual or fast and furious, it tends to be tough for the celebs, particularly the guys. But they made valiant efforts!
1. Mark and Lacey kicked off with a Rumba.
My first reaction was that he didn't do much. She danced around him (which is fairly typical of what the male celebs get to get away with). but I must confess: I was so transfixed by Lacey's ugly ugly shoes to notice much about the dance. They were seriously unflattering to her legs, I'll just say that. It was so transfixing that we went and watched the dance over again, and that's when we actually saw that he was doing some moves, but they were a little too sharp and too hard for the Rumba. Bottom line: I think he'll be safe, but it wasn't a great week for him.
2. Joanna and Derek danced the Samba.
This was a hard routine, so when she carried it off...particularly with sharp arms and good hip action...it was impressive. However, her weakness is, well, her weakness. Her last pose was terrible, and at other times it was clear she was losing her stamina. Bottom line: She's generally really good, so I don't think she's at risk...but pretty models tend to go early, so she'll need to step it up.
3. Mya and Dmitry danced the Rumba.
Well, as I said when this wrapped up: Can't argue with that. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Mya is a ringer. Seriously, three weeks in, only a ringer could exhibit such flexibility and musicality and aptitude for tough choreography. Bottom line: She's safe.
4. Melissa and Mark danced the Samba.
She made a good effort, but much of the time she seemed stilted and wore the furrowed brow of concern. Bottom line: I fear she's at risk with this performance.
5. Louie and Chelsie danced the Rumba.
OK, I guess they're a cute little couple. And he does remind me of the Breckin Meyer character in Clueless. But I thought this was a bit overrated. Chelsie was amazing...she always has the best legs/hips, but that mean t she overshadowed him a bit too much. Also, the choreography was a bit frantic for my taste. (I know, I sound like Len.) Bottom line: They do have chemistry, and I do think they're safe.
6. Debi and Maks danced the Samba
Game over. She looked really confused and concerned the entire time. I don't think she did enough to escape being in the Bottom Two again. Bottom Line: Further, I think time might be up for Debi! Sure, there are a couple of couples who deserve to go home more, but I don't think she's pulling in the votes.
7. Donny and Kym danced the Rumba/
It was brave of Kym to give Donny a solo and shine the spotlight right on him, but he didn't step up to the challenge and commit with his hips. He was OK, but this was the first time he couldn't rely purely on his performance charm, and he was not as good as the first two weeks. But a good effort...and if he only brought the looseness he exhibited right *after* the performance (in that weird performance with Bruno, wha'?) it would have been even better. Bottom line: Do you need to ask? He is safe.
8. MIchael and Anna danced the Samba.
Oh dear. When he could just groove freestyle, he had some moments. But mostly, this was very constrained and not very good at all. Bottom line: Oh, if he weren't a famous football player, he'd be bottom two for sure!
9. Natalie and Alec danced the Rumba.
I agree with Carrie Anne, I really like Natalie. Mostly she has the most beautiful body. Long, lean, strong but not scary skinny. Great lines, and great potential. Sometimes her face looked a little embarrassed to be doing this sexy dance, but otherwise I thought she did a pretty great job. Bottom line: She's safe.
10. Chuck and Anna danced the Samba.
This was not his dance at all. He had no looseness or action in his hips at all. He may have worked very hard, but it was pretty bad. Now, just like Michael Irvin, Chuck seems like a "sports" guy who will be cut a lot of slack. So. Bottom line: I think he should go, but he will be safe.
11. Aaron and Karina danced the Rumba.
This had really good moments, but he was a little over the top. And he was more focused on the audience than on his partner. Not only that, but he doesn't have a lot of upper body strength, so he seemed like sometimes he was going to not be able to support Karina with some of the tricks. Bottom line: Despite those weaknesses, he has a lot of advantages, and I think he'll be safe.
12. Tom and Cheryl danced the Samba.
Call me crazy, but I don't enjoy watching someone injure themselves to be on a reality talent show. It made me uncomfortable...especially when he was swiveling his hips. Although I'll admit the discomfort at that point wasn't about his broken feet. But broken feet aside, this was pretty bad...I mean he was counting out loud throughout the beginning. That's just wrong. It was also a really slow, leisurely samba through most of it. Bottom line: Should be at risk, and if everyone felt as uncomfortable as I was watching him dance through the pain, they may want to put him out of his misery.
13. Kelly and Louis danced the Samba.
Ooh. how she has lost her confidence and verve. She was looking so worried, looking at her feet, looking blank. Not good. I think she'll still get that underdog vote, but people may only stick with her another week before they get tired of her unconfidence. Bottom line: She might even be at risk this week!
Bottom line for the Bottom Two:
Lots of people were not so good, and only a few were great. That means a lot of people are at risk.
Every season I do what many women do which is to pry open a 200 page magazine and see what is going on in the world of fashion. So what if it is stuff that you wouldn't be caught dead in? So what if you think the idea of platforms and all 80's all the time is nauseating, it's still fun to look.
The thing is that this fall the trends seem to big and bold; things that make a statement are 'In'. No one wants to see subtly if there's ruffles then those ruffles better be Pilgrim-esque and up to your chin. If there is color it needs to be stand out color. Not blacks or browns with a little oomph thrown in for good measure but something that says, "Hello! I am here! Look at me!" I must say that I'm a little bit in love with fall. My love also might be because I own things that are in and I rarely own things that are in. I'm more of a classics girl; there is a lot of cashmere and turtlenecks and then I go out and pick up the pieces that will make me look like I know what I'm doing even if I'm only playing a Fashionista on the Internet.
So back to the beginning when I was reading InStyle (at least I think it was InStyle so let's just say that it was some very large magazine that was instructing me how to dress for the fall and I was all OBEY!) and one of the trends for the fall that goes into the 'big and bold' category are vintage-esque accessories. Larger gold pieces that stand out against a solid background. And when I saw this there was a jump for joy because dear reader, I owned something vintage-esque.
I purchased this toggle, pearl, gold necklace last year after an unfortunate mishap where I lost a strand of Mikimoto pearls. I don't want to talk about it because it is far too painful but I did end up going out and buying something - anything - that would help me overcome this tragedy because, ya'll, I LOVE my pearls. I found this at Elissa Halloran Designs in Albany, NY. I'm still shocked that they were found in my hometown because as far as I knew, Albany never had anything cool. But there they were waiting for me. Saying, come hither Heather. I wear them with turtlenecks when I don't want to wear regular pearls. They're fun and add something extra to the outfit. Even special occasions that might call for something that cost more than twenty bucks. I get loads of compliments and they are the epitome of accessories: anything that adds something but doesn't take away from the rest of the outfit.
They're like friends; they emphasize the good part and keep attention away from the bad.
Madeline Albright is in the news again these days, but not for her diplomatic career. Well, not exactly. During her tenure as Secretary of State, Albright was known for her dramatic jewelry -- specifically, her pins. Secretary Albright's pins are the focus of an exhibit at the Museum of Arts and Design, for the opening of "Read My Pins: The Madeleine Albright Collection." Secretary Albright has a new book out as well, also titled "Read My Pins."
"Former President George H.W. Bush had been known for saying 'Read my lips,'" Albright writes. "I began urging colleagues and reporters to 'Read my pins.'"
StyleList's Lesley Kennedy explicates some of Secretary Albright's more famous pins, including the serpent, the dove, and the atlas. Albright chose her pins -- she prefers that term to the fancier "brooches" -- to reflect the situation she was dealing with at the moment. Kennedy writes that Albright used her trio of "Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil" monkey pins "to chide Russian President Vladimir Putin for his failure to acknowledge human rights violations committed by the Russian military in the violence-plagued region of Chechnya."
We should all be so thoughtful with our accessories.
Accessories are a simple way to update your wardrobe -- add a fun necklace to your basic tee, or a big pin to your favorite sweater -- but they can also make a statement. Think about accessories as one more way to give basic pieces personality.
Your personality. Of course.
My accessory of choice is a statement necklace; I'm not an earring girl, and pins are too complicated for me. But a big, bold necklace is easy to fold into my existing wardrobe, and makes a huge difference. Recently, I've been bidding on cool pieces on eBay, but most of my necklaces are OOAK pieces that came from craft shows or small local artisans.
Michelle Obama has worked her brooches -- pins? -- into her every day wardrobe. Most recently, she appeared at the opening ceremony of the 121st IOC Session at the Copenhagen Opera House in a stunning Rodarte dress embellished with three flower pins. So perfectly Mrs. O.
Get out your jewelry box and see what's in there -- think about how to work your existing jewelry into your current closet. Bust out the pearls and the dramatic earrings and that cool ring you've always loved but never known where to wear. Wear it to the office, or to dinner, or to playgroup. Why not?
You'll be making a statement, which is always a good thing.
Do you have a go-to accessory? A signature piece or look? If you could have any piece as your go-to, what would it be?
It is National Information Literacy Awareness Month 2009. I belong to a listserv of that is concerned about libraries and information literacy. Let me tell you, they were doing the virtual happy dance that information literacy was being acknowledge. Sure there is not a bunch of pink ribbons for information literacy like there are for Breast Cancer Awareness but it is a start. Symbolically, we could all donate a dollar secretly to a library in a random act of kindness.
Still, I would love to see commercials, public service announcements, soup cans and full page ads with some sexy dude in a pair of black skimpy skimps imploring me to critically examine that housing contract before I sign it. True, it is a sexist thought but a half naked guy is a great visual motivator and a great springboard for discussing topics like literacy.
Information literacy is defined as the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate and effectively use that information.
Information literacy is and has always been a means of protection. It is your intellectual invisible shield against being lied, scammed or robbed by non-violent predators. As the technology changes the literacy demands must also change and evolve.
Yes, everyone should know how to read for information, how to count their money and how to write personal and business correspondence. If that is all you know how to do then you will be an information illiterate person. There is more, there is so much more to literacy. This is not the 18th century, we can't go back no matter how many people want to drag us back in time.
Educators and Librarians are understandably concerned, engaged and otherwise want in on the discussion about information literacy. It is bad for business to have disengaged library patrons or patrons that cannot access services. It is not just literacy but transliteracy – the ability to use different tools, media and still have the ability to evaluate content.
If we only focus on literacy we are doing a disservice to our patrons. Just as libraries took on the task of helping to ensure all people are literate, now we need to take on the task of ensure all people are transliterate.
You should also check out a video of Sue Thompson giving a lecture to her graduate students about the importance of having multiple literacy skills.
Anna Batchelder is at the helm of Literacy is Priceless. She searches for free literacy resources on the Internet that teachers and educators can use or be inspired to adapt to their classroom. Sheila Webber looks at information literacy practices from around the world.
This also lead me to Health Literacy Out Loud – a ongoing health literacy podcast on the economics, training, obstacles and reality of working with a health illiterate population.
The information is pouring out all over but there is a disconnection between those that know and those that need to know.
Feeling A Little Tuckered
I don't feel very academic today. I'm more in battle fatigue mode. I feel like most of my time has been spent finding information for people who should have these skills. We all should have them. I find that I live in a time where we take the word of anyone over taking the time to check it out for ourselves.
Too many of our friends and neighbors have take the path of least resistance; they just turn on the television or radio and accept whatever is being presented.
The past couple of months have been a huge disappointment. Truly, I did not think we were this myopic, selfish, ill-informed and proud of it. "Why can't they see forward past their noses?" I've been nattering on like that for days to myself. My friends have the good sense to stay away from when I hit one of these moods.
Well, I guess the Muse on Duty had enough. I was riding the bus this morning and glanced at Transit TV. Transit TV is a big fan of Powerpoint-type slides. Anyway, I look up and I see this quote:
"Everyone is ignorant – but on different issues." American humorist and philosopher, Will Rogers
Might have been the ego slap that I needed. Because how dare I assume that we all know? How do I know what you know if we've had different life experiences? We all have gone through different education systems or training of various qualities. We are not the same.
Part of my life's mission is to be a conduit, not a critic. I have to believe we can rise above the petty and get to the profound tasks that are ahead of us.
Maybe the title of the post is unkind or less than tactful. I don't care. Based on the behavior of the past few months of public discourse we may be already screwed and not in a good way. My pessimism is kinda low. I am struggling to hold on to the light of accuracy and true information illumination.
This is a mood. It will pass. I'm just impatient. I think I'll take my ignorant behind to bed and read a book.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) is trying to make sure that the health reform legislation under consideration in Congress will finally ban a practice that is legal in eight states: denying health insurance to victims of domestic violence on the grounds that it constitutes a pre-existing condition. It's something that she has been trying to get done for years, as she explained on CNN today:
:
When I first heard about this, I was as incredulous as Murray was, and I checked it out as well. Here is what I learned.
First, according the White-House sponsored site HealthReform.gov confirms that it is legal in nine states to deny coverage to victims of domestic violence. The SEIU blog names names: Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wyoming and the District of Columbia.
Next, University of Dayton Law school student Linda Noll researched the insurance companies' rationale: The basic argument is that insurance companies don't want to insure domestic violence victims because they are more likely to need it:
From the health insurance companies' perspective, the domestic violence victim has a potentially increased use of medical facilities because of the assaults from their abuser. The insurance companies view the increased use as the increased cost in providing for that individual which would be an increased cost to the consumer or a reduction in coverage as they do with many other conditions.
The Huffington Post's Ryan Grim reported last month that several big insurance companies have promised to stop denying coverage to domestic violence victims in the past, only to renege:
n 1994, then-Rep. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), now a member of Senate leadership, had his staff survey 16 insurance companies. He found that eight would not write health, life or disability policies for women who have been abused. In 1995, the Boston Globefound that Nationwide, Allstate, State Farm, Aetna, Metropolitan Life, The Equitable Companies, First Colony Life, The Prudential and the Principal Financial Group had all either canceled or denied coverage to women who'd been beaten.
Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon suspects that health care practitioners might avoid screening for possible domestic violence for fear that noting the questions in a patient's medical records might endanger her coverage. Of course, failing to identify and help abuse victims can endanger their lives.
Back to Senator Murray, who has actually been trying to get a law passed on this issue since 2001. On October 1, she introduced the Security and Financial Empowerment Act (SAFE) with cosponsors Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) . A companion bill was introduced on the House side last January. In addition to the insurance protections, the bill's other benefits include ensuring that someone who loses a job because of the need to escape an abuser can still collect unemployment.
The SEIU urges voters to write their Congressional representatives urging them to ban the practice of denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions, including domestic violence. They provide a handy online form as well.
Do you know of anyone who has been denied insurance coverage for this reason? What did they do? Do you support Murray's effort?
Whether you're a voter or a political candidate (and of course some of us are both), chances are you've heard at least one of the above phrases, either uttered by a politician or a loved one.
Right?
Of course right.
But what do they - what do we - really want? What do any of us really want when we ask for and come to expect support from someone?
In my case, during my election, support for me has come to mean never having to say I'm sorry for not having folded the clothes. And my mutual support is folding a basketful of my husband's dress socks and realizing as I'm doing it that not once did he ever growl or complain about having a virtually empty sock drawer.
I know this may sound so 1950s, but anyone in a relationship should be able to relate to the fact that we do agree to certain divisions of labor. And that's fine. But under extraordinary circumstances, like having a full-time job, three kids, a home under construction and running for office, you know, something has gotta give and that something that gives? Allowing it to give, without freaking out? To me, that's support.
And then, there's support that comes in the form of not giving me the support everyone else thinks I need but rather only giving me what I say I need.
For example, in these last 648 hours before my campaign and the election is over, I confess and I know: I'm going to need all the support I can get. But here's an example from a few weeks ago of what I don't need: One of my kids started proofing one of my pieces of campaign literature and started to talk and tell me what he didn't like. I had to shoo him away and say, three times, a la Gwen Stefani, "This my s**t!" (and what's going on in the race is indeed bananas, but that's another post). Okay - I didn't curse at him, but that's what I was feeling inside.
This IS my stuff, and I have to make most of the decisions. It's a small race, a small town, there's no a manager of this, advisor of that, and on and on. It's just moi.
And that's fine, but then the buck stops with me - I cannot blame anyone else (and trust me, I've wanted to a few times already but it's just not an option - I'm the candidate, beginning, middle and end).
Yehhhhhht - making such a choice means carrying a huge burden, on top of my usual non-campaign-related responsibilities. And so knowing that I have..."support" becomes critical to survival.
And so it was that, over one weekend before the Jewish High Holy Days, I saw a laundry basket full of my husband's dress socks. And I went to his sock drawer, opened it up and smiled a curling my lip under smile in recognition of the drawer's emptiness and my routine neglect of the laundry (or delegation to my youngest two kids) during these final weeks before November 3.
And I realized that the best support my husband has been giving me has been the freedom to neglect chores here and there and either pick up the slack himself, or just let it go.
Again, if you've been in a relationship, chances are you know just how huge a support that can be.
After reading Michael Pollan's book, The Omnivore's Dilemma and seeing the film, Food Inc., I added the task "Visit farms and ranches where my food comes from" to my ongoing, never-ending "To Do" list. And it sat there. And sat there. Until a couple of incidents spurred me to get serious. First, reading about the very sad 
The thing is that this fall the trends seem to big and bold; things that make a statement are 'In'. No one wants to see subtly if there's ruffles then those ruffles better be Pilgrim-esque and up to your chin. If there is color it needs to be stand out color. Not blacks or browns with a little oomph thrown in for good measure but something that says, "Hello! I am here! Look at me!" I must say that I'm a little bit in love with fall. My love also might be because I own things that are in and I rarely own things that are in. I'm more of a classics girl; there is a lot of cashmere and turtlenecks and then I go out and pick up the pieces that will make me look like I know what I'm doing even if I'm only playing a Fashionista on the Internet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment