I'm officially confused. Are little girls made of sugar and spice or puppy dog tails?

It's Halloween tomorrow. Happy Halloween everyone! And I saw this article about Halloween costumes:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/living/sexy-costumes-kids/index.html?iref=allsearch

Basically, the article is about sexy Halloween costumes for kids. Let me just say that I find the idea of "sexy" and "kids" together beyond repulsive. But, I'm confused by the article. The author says:

What girls hear is who they are is how they look, and how they have to look is "hot," which is creating problems for girls at an ever-younger age, says Peggy Orenstein, author of "Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the New Girly-Girl Culture."

"Girls are learning at the youngest ages that their value comes from how they look, and the definition of attractive is very narrowly defined as being sexy or sassy (for the younger girls)," Orenstein says. "Sexuality is imposed upon them inappropriately, and they are encouraged to define their bodies -- not by how their bodies feel to themselves, but by how they look to others. This creates vulnerabilities for girls to the pitfalls we worry about -- distorted body image, eating disorders, depression and unhealthy sexual behavior."

This makes some sense. In treating kids in a "sexy" way with their clothing, they start to define themselves that way. But, there's a problem. Is this statistically shown?

Another recent CNN article (http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/04/opinion/bennett-men-in-trouble/index.html?iref=allsearch) starts with this line:

For the first time in history, women are better educated, more ambitious and arguably more successful than men.

The article goes on to ask whether women even need men anymore. It cites statistics showing "women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women's earnings grew 44% in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men."

This seems to be something of a contradiction to me. The one article thinks we are more and more teaching our girls to define themselves on how they look for men. The other article seems to be saying that women are looking to men less and less.

After reading some more articles and recent statistics and thinking about this a little, I am concerned that what we are actually talking about is not women and their role, but men.

It is an absolute fact that we have two sexes. It is also an absolute fact that those two sexes must interact. But that interaction is defined by the roles of the sexes.

I would never put my daughter in a "sexy" Halloween costume. I will also work hard to keep my daughter from any "sexy" anything for the next 30 years or so. I will talk to my daughter about family, career, competence, and caring. I hope that she will learn to respect herself for who she is. All of who she is. I will discuss the same issues with my son and hope that he respects himself for who he is.

But how society talks to my daughter has a direct bearing on my son. For if society is accepting my daughter as a person who fulfills the traditionally male roles of breadwinner, repair person, head of household, etc. Then, my son may wonder where he stands in relation to girls. And if the only answer we give him is a "look at how sexy she is" one, what are we teaching our boys?

It seems to me that our girls are pretty strong. They were traditionally told that their role was in the home and not the workplace, but this has changed. It is now well accepted that our women belong in the workplace, in the colleges, in the home, in sports. Basically, their role is everywhere.

But, what role have we given our sons. As a culture, we have been awfully slow to adopt a changed role for men. We still focus on boys' roles in the workplace and sports and have not accepted their roles as homemakers. This leaves them in a zone where their role is less than and not equal to that of women. Not only is this not sustainable, but what ends up as the focus is the difference in sexual roles. This is the one area where the traditional roles stick.

Our men need a new role. They need us to accept that they have the capability to take care of children, do the laundry, and cook dinner just as much as women have the capability to work on budgets, direct a company, or play sports. If we don't expand this role, the difference between men and women comes down to who is looking at who and who is being looked at. This is clearly not the role we want for either gender.

After two weekends in a row at Daddy's house, my 4-year-old daughter suddenly thinks she is the boss. She has always been a bit bossy, but this is a whole new level of "Isis in charge."

"Go to bed, Mommy."

"Get yourself some water, Mommy."

"Go sit over there."

At daycare today, she said, "shhh. Be quiet." When I told her that wasn't very nice, she said, "be quiet, please." The teacher laughed her butt off.

Orion is taking it in stride. He's 2. So, saying "no" is just par for the course with him, but I am starting to feel a little like the errant child. I keep saying "no" to instructions, not requests.

I really don't like having to assert my mominance. When I tell my kids it is bedtime, I am not very happy to hear "no, it's TV time." That doesn't really fly.

Orion likes to take those moments to grab my phone or Isis' blanket and insist that it is now "Orion's" phone or blanket. Everybody ends up grumpy when the counting starts.

Not that I wouldn't like someone else to be in charge. I'm totally ready to hand over our finances to Isis. I figure that a 4-year-old couldn't make any more of a mess than the legal battles, roof leaks, car repairs, winter clothes, and more legal battles have already made. Maybe she could actually figure out how to pay for any of this mess.

But, I think things will go better if I'm in charge. When Isis told me to go to bed, I told her that I had to drive her to ballet. She said, "I can drive. I'm just slow." Yeah. I think I better be awake, very alert, and in charge of this situation.

The romance novels have it wrong. I don't want a man with flowing hair. Ew. That mess would just clog the shower drain.

I don't want a man who is a borderline abuser. No way.

I don't want a "bad boy" who changes when he falls in love with me. I know that trick. He changes right back when there is someone cute at the office.

No, I don't want the romance novel hero. Those men suck. It takes them over 100 pages to catch on to a hint.

I'm more interested in men from different genres of books.

Give me a man from a cook book. Not one of those books on Bar-B-Que. I mean, seriously, you need a book for that? Fire. Meat. Isn't that pretty much the caveman story?

No, I want a man from one of those cookbooks where they make wonderful things with local produce and amazing sauces. Those men know how to turn the stove to medium. In my experience, men believe the stove is "off" or "on" (high). Not only do these lovely cooks know how to use a stove, they have money. They have a day job and a book contract. Bring me that man.

In that vein, I'll take the men from the finance genre. They may not be sparkling conversationalists, but the romance novel guys aren't much better and make the women angry. At least the finance guys will put me to sleep and I could use a good night of sleep. With the finance guy, I bet that night of sleep would be on some awesome percale sheets.

I definitely don't want the guy from the chick lit genre. I don't really understand that guy and it all seems to involve a lot of longing. I'm not really into the long-distance longing.

I'll take the guy from the erotica section. But only for a night.

Then, I gotta move on to the guy from the biographies. There is some serious adventure packed into those guys. They could take me around the world in great, fun ways. Not like those self-help jerks that just want to tell me what's wrong with me all the time. Those guys are always so serious. No, the biography guys have some humor, some adventure, and some good history you can check out.

Lastly, I'll happily run off into the sunset with the guys from the "how it works" genre. I'm not truly interested in knowing how my toaster works and I recognize that those guys are going to tear it apart. But, I don't really use my toaster anyway and when it comes down to it, those guys can save me thousands of dollars a year. I'll never have to hire another person to repair or build me anything.

The difference between fantasy and reality is comfort and practicality. I like to read romance and self-help, but if a man is going to step out of a book into my life, he better have a job, know how to cook, fix my washer, and keep his opinion about what's wrong with me to himself.

I have to admit that I love the Nook. This is completely unsolicited. One of my nurses had an eReader one day at work and I nearly destroyed it because I'm clumsy, but it was really cool.

I have been completely against eReaders since they came out. Books are a passion for me. They line the walls of my house and crowd all the flat surfaces. The idea of giving up those amazing pages just rubbed me the wrong way.

But, there is something about the Nook. I think it's the name. Seriously, they actually allowed the thing to be called the "Nook-e-book-reader". How can you not love something called the "nooky"? On top of that, it's a Nook. For those of you who do not have small children or who are not reading children's books as a hobby, you may not get the joke. But, those of us who know Dr. Seuss's classic One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish by heart know that it's pretty funny because a Nook can't read.

I was in Barnes and Noble the other day and actually played with one of these things for a while. It's TINY! Plus, the words are so easy on the eyes on the screen. It was totally something I could put in my purse and pull out and read while waiting at the DMV or whatever. So, it got me thinking that I might want to try it.

I did not buy a new Nook. I don't have that kind of cash. But, I did get a used, first-generation Nook off someone pretty cheaply. I thought I would try it. The first generation ones are not tiny. They also do this black flash thing when you turn the page. It is a bit annoying.

On the other hand, I can hold it in one hand in bed and read for quite a while. My eyes don't get tired and it's not that heavy. I am enjoying it.

I admit to some guilt, though. I look at all my wonderful books and I wonder what I am doing to them. I feel slightly like I am betraying the actual printed word.

I will still read my physical books. After all, it's pretty hard to judge a book by it's cover on the Nook. Since that's how I choose most of what I read, I'm heading to the bookstore and the library anyway.

So fellow bibliophiles, be not afraid. Try out the Nook. It's a neat toy and after you have your Christmas-morning love affair with it, it will just be a second way to read. It won't hurt your books. And if you've got the cash, get this teeny-tiny one. I will totally envy you.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/nook/index.asp?PID=35699#logo

Facebook is making me feel old. I read an article about how Facebook hasn't had a good new release in a while. I also heard a ton about how changes had occurred. I hadn't been on Facebook on a computer in a long time, so I logged on. All these messages popped up and I was just clicking, not really understanding what a mess I was making. Now, I have no idea what I have. Some of my friends have been dumped into family. Some have been dumped other places. I don't know what happened to my blocked stuff or privacy. I don't know what I'm looking at. I had just gotten my front screen how I liked it and now everything is different.

It seems odd to crab about Facebook. It's not my kitchen, after all. But, they have got to realize that not all of the people using it grew up with cell phones and laptops. Some of us are still upset about the demise of the physical answering machine. We don't move at the pace of technology.

I once heard an interview where the guy said that people born before 1980 are "tech immigrants" and people born after 1980 are "tech natives". I am normally pretty good with technology. I recently correctly identified when I was being bullshitted about a programming roll-out. I'm fairly decent.

But, I am a tech immigrant. Once I learn the language and culture, I'm good, but it takes me a while to make the change. I don't want to feel this old. Slow down a little, Facebook. I'm still young.

Being locked in a personal war with someone you can't even remember what they look like is completely bizarre.

These divorce actions that drag on and on are the most odd sort of wars. They are wars between two people that are not supposed to involve allies. They are not supposed to involve arms races. They are not supposed to be real wars. But they are. They are arms races of lawyers and legal fees. They involve allies who have built their own bitternesses. They are fought on paper and in court.

I was talking to a friend who is headed to court again and his divorce was 6 or 7 years ago. He told me he now understands the Cold War.

Divorce wars are cold wars. We fight the war, but life goes on.

These wars are so odd. I'm in this war and yet my life isn't impacted. I'm not "at war". I'm at work or at home. I'm at ballet with my daughter. I'm at a party for my son's friend. I'm at Grandma and Grandpa's house. I'm out dancing. I'm out to dinner. I'm at a friend's house laughing with the girls. I'm in bed reading. I'm in the living room singing. It doesn't feel much like a war.

Make no mistake. There is fighting. It's a sad kind of fighting where someone who is really angry and just can't let go creates dramas to fight over. Things that anyone in my life would just ask me about and we would talk about and figure out and compromise and be done with. But this person isn't in my life, so it doesn't work that way.

I suppose that is the hallmark of the war. If there was compromise, there would be no skirmishes. So, to maintain the anger, compromise and reasonable discussion have to be avoided at all costs.

I'm not immune. In the beginning, I was angry. I was hurt. I was active in the war. But I think these things should be handled like baseball. There should be a certain number of innings, a certain number of battles, and then someone declares the end. Only the most angry people can carry on for the long-haul and allowing those angry, vengeful people to set the direction of these conflicts seems to be a bad way for our society to progress.

Because the reality is that most people move on. There is a point when most people have realized their life really is better. Most people find new loves, lives, and hobbies. Most people have long forgotten the squabbles and skirmishes and have new concerns and quandries.

And this is what creates the unreality. When one person is so angry for so long... When it stays so real and so present for one person.... When one person still cares so much.... The other person is left locked in a cold war with a foe they don't remember for reasons they no longer understand. You're left feeling a little like you are taking care of other's people's problems.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/First-Person-5-Products-I-ac-3331555504.html?x=0

This is a great, brief article on how one person saved money by spending more on certain products. I love this. One of the things that frustrates me is how much extra money people will spend trying to save. People don't seem to understand that if you buy a product at Walmart for a cheaper price, it is most often actually a cheaper product and you end up buying more of it. Thus, you spend more money.

This is a strange and confusing concept. I wish more people were able to take the long-term view when it comes to finances. We would all be better off for it.

This week was my week to discover I am completely OCD when it comes to being a mom. I'm a little OCD anyway. Sometimes, I think I have turned into my father. "Turn that light out!" "Close the door!" But, I'm mostly functional.

This week, Isis started ballet. She had the option of soccer, gymnastics, or ballet. She wanted ballet. I don't know how I raised such a princess. I was never a princess. I know nothing about being a princess, but she is THE princess Isis.

For ballet, I was told that they had to have a very specific outfit, very specific shoes, and their hair in a bun.

This was the most terrifying thing I have faced in a long time. I have NO idea how to do hair. My daughter has short hair. How on earth was I supposed to put it in a bun? I tried to practice, but she hates having me do her hair, so that didn't go well.

I wanted to make sure my baby had everything she needed. I was terrified that we would get to her class and they would tell her she couldn't participate because she wasn't dressed just right. I was terrified the other kids might say something to her and she would feel embarrassed. So, we got it just right.

I ended up with her hair in two buns. It wasn't pretty, but she certainly was!

When we got to class, I realized that I was the only person who had worried so much about this.

The next day, I had to inform the daycare teachers that I was running late and had neglected to put sunscreen on my kids that morning.

"That's ok. You're the only parent that does it consistently anyway."

You would think that this little wake-up call would help me to let go of some of the feeling of responsibility. It didn't. I still spent the weekend making sure everything was absolutely perfect for my kids.

On the other hand, I have relaxed a little. Just knowing that I'm not a monster if I miss something is a huge relief.

Off to clean the bathroom....