Don't hate the Mayer, hate the Game, plus the odd Butterly Effect

I've left a lot of comments in a lot of places (most notably here, here, and here) this week about what I'm now utterly convinced is great news for women everywhere: Marissa Mayer, a 37-year-old pregnant woman, has been named CEO of Yahoo.

As @mom2boy put it so well in my comments section: "Take that glass ceiling." Yes, it really and truly is fantastic news. Full stop.

Of course, the response hasn't been all unicorns and rainbows though. I've learned a lot about certain corners of Corporate America this week, and about what's possible, and about what the costs might be.

At first, I'll admit, I was (and am) disappointed by Mayer's seemingly anti-feminist statements that could have been cribbed from Rush Limbaugh (feminists are "militant" and "have chips on their shoulder"... holy hell, I can't even defend that shizz), but upon further reflection I finally have begun to understand the social meaning of her words within the very specific, boundaried space of American tech culture. Now that I have a better handle on the relevant background assumptions of this culture, I think I can read her statements in their proper context, and see her remarks for the kind of coded language they probably are.

She's a master player of the game, no question. One of the unbreakable rules of this game might be don't you dare undermine the meritocracy myth cherished by the male tech geeks who actually control the system, or else they will fuck you up, apparently even if you're their boss. In 2012, it seems there is still no magical pinnacle you can ever reach in a large American tech career where it is safe to let your feminist flag fly if you wanted to. Can this really be so?

If true, what a sobering reality. And one I am, alas, in no position to refute. I simply note that if you take Mayer's words at face value, it's easy to conclude one can really get ahead by vocally distancing oneself from feminism. What Mayer actually believes in her heart is an open and probably irrelevant question. This all reminds me a bit too much of the progressive community's response to the appointment of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. He also played the game extremely well. [Insert disclaimer here: not all members of underprivileged groups must vocally and at all times support the liberation movements for those same groups. Duh.]

Against this backdrop I say: Don't hate the player, hate the game. The game sucks. And by game I, of course, mean patriarchy. Don't hate on Mayer for making it despite the odds being stacked against her. Be happy for her. Be happy for the hope her promotion to the CEO title gives to women, that yes, it is possible. It may not be terribly likely if you're an outspoken feminist who won't hide your true feelings at work, but nevertheless it is possible, and she proved it.

There's one other aspect raised by all of this that's been on my mind this week. There's this false and troubling Butterfly Effect-esque idea out there that whenever a woman becomes a mother, her work choices can start messing things up for all of these other people - many of whom she is not even related to, nor has ever met before.

Walk this through with me and tell me if I'm wrong.

Odd Butterfly Effect argument, Example #1 - If a mother stays home, and lets her husband be the family breadwinner, according to believers of the Butterfly Effect-esque idea, she's messing things up for his natural competitors at work by giving him unfair time and resource advantages against them. If he's somebody's boss, it's constructed as her choice to stay home that's responsible for making him choose to penalize those of his employees who would rather not work long hours and to favor those employees who do work the longer hours. The fact that he's an asshole is not assigned any responsibility. (My, what power this mother has.)

Odd Butterfly Effect argument, Example #2 - If a mother works outside the home in a corporate setting, she's got to return from maternity leave at the socially correct time, instead of the time that might feel right for her personally, or else - Butterfly Effect! Other parents she doesn't even work with are going to be harmed! Her choice to resume work before using all of her paid time is constructed as undermining the work/life balance opportunities for other people, even those of people who work at some other random company. Which brings us to Mayer's situation.

Mayer says she plans to take a 2-week-long maternity leave, which has some folks concerned because they feel it's too short. (Ironically, two weeks is still far longer than the vast majority of working mothers in America can hope to enjoy.) The most common iterations of this reaction are "she's a clueless first time mom who is just fooling herself" or "she's acting too 'macho' if she honestly thinks she can pull it off" (see the original Anne-Marie Slaughter fallacy: "Because I wouldn't do it therefore no one can"). I actually believe this is still yet more coded language from Mayer - the CEO of a public company would rather not see her company's stock go right into the shitter because she was foolish enough to make an in-stone proclamation 3 months in advance when she can, of course, change her mind if her postpartum reality differs from her initial estimate. Also, I haven't heard anyone mention this possibility yet, but often the full leave benefits only accrue after working at company for at least a year - I'm even talking about professional jobs where 12 weeks might be the norm, you still might not be guaranteed to get it if you've only been working there for a few months.

Does a choice that, by the way, Mayer hasn't even technically made yet, really and truly harm any other employees? Inside or outside of Yahoo? I don't necessarily think so, given that the real harm is being done by the people who are in the actual positions to say yes or no to a leave request, as well as those who have been running the places with the policies that have sucked for so long. Possibly I'm wrong though. Many who are critical of Mayer's two week maternity leave announcement are citing the supposed Zoe Cruz precedent (who didn't take the full time off herself then was apparently hostile to folks at Morgan Stanley who wanted flex time).

Can't we at least wait until Mayer's leave is over before we assess what the verdict is for folks at Yahoo? In the meantime, let's blame the actual people in charge for the issues that continue to plague us elsewhere. You know what kids say - "You're not the boss of me!" Blame the actual boss of you. That said, I get it though - Mayer is an easy scapegoat; she's been all over the news lately, so she's a convenient person to blame for the fact that the corporate game too often just plain sucks. Hate the game, not the player. Hate the game, learn to play it better. Or stop playing (full disclosure: that's what I did). Or start your own game (also what I did).

That's all I've got. Sock it to me now.

True Blood S5:E6 recap

Fantastic episode! Truly, this was one of the best in a long while. It covered a lot of territory but seemed like it was only about 15 minutes long. And to think only a few short episodes ago I was sipping the haterade on this season. Well, I stand corrected!

Let me begin by saying how much I thoroughly enjoy Denis O'Hare in the role of Russell Edgington, and I'm so glad he's back in the saddle again. He totally owns that role, and it works. Talk about cheering for the villain. I hope Russell sticks around beyond this season: "Fuck The Authority!"

The scenes in the haunted asylum of doom were just awesome. Beel fake glamouring Sookie - "you belong in the sun." They have such natural chemistry (and in real life they are apparently expecting twins in October.)

Cheeky, tricky, delicious, conniving Eric is back!! Glamoring away Alcide's romantic interest in Sookie while at the same time commanding Alcide to defend her with his life - well played, Mr. Northman. I have a feeling you'll be doing the ol' mattress mambo with Sookie again in no time. Let's pray it actually looks sexy next time though. It was funny how Sookie figured out what Eric had done to Alcide - "you recoiled from me??" Loved it!

What was up with the bus massacre of the human witnesses? Is *every* chancellor of the Authority scheming behind Roman's back?? I think Salome is going to be the next Grand Pooh Bah of the Authority, and she's just biding her time until she gets rid of Roman. Nora is a true believer? Seems like Eric now thinks so.

Back at Authority HQ, when Eric tried to warn them that Russell is the strongest vampire he's ever known and they'd all better watch out - once he said that I knew Russell would be busting out of there, but I was totally surprised by how fast it happened. When Russell's insta-staker failed and he turned the tables on Roman then apparently staked him in return, Roman did not immediately turn to red goo - his face got all weird and veiny and puffy. So has Roman really met the true death? Makes me wonder if Roman has some sort of vampire equivalent of a bulletproof vest going on under his golf shirt. I suppose we'll find out first thing next episode.

Moving on to the show's other vamps - I'm loving Jessica this season. It's such an interesting contrast - Jessica's humanistic values and "upbringing" from genteel Beel compared to the tough love, alpha-tastic way Tara is being "raised" by ruthless, fabulous Pam. Why can't everyone just get along? ;)

Lafayette's visit to his mama - who also sees dead people, naturally - was fun to watch. "Jesus loves the little faggots!" Ah, the priceless writing on this show.

Arlene is one of my other bizarre favorites, and when Cursed Terry finally broke it all down for her and came clean about the things he did in Iraq when he was most certainly not "just following orders" - I loved her response about getting back on his meds. Arlene has moxie, and she has to be responsible for 3 little people - and what a sad goodbye. I know not everyone is a fan of The Ifrit/smoke monster storyline - but I'm also seeing it as a mini nod to actress Carrie Preston's real life - her husband is Michael Emerson who played Ben Linus on "Lost," home of the original smoke monster that held people accountable for their sins. Hmm...

Sookie and Jason visit fairyland/Moulin Rouge - readers of the books will be more than a bit suspicious of the motives behind certain "fairy tales" - namely, the convenient story about the vampire who killed the Stackhouses because he smelled Sookie's blood on an old band-aid in the backseat of their car. Is that even true? Will they try to pin it on Beel? Eric? Russell? We know from prior seasons (old newspaper clippings found in Beel's home) that Beel might have been following Sookie since her childhood. We know the fae hate the vamps and would like to turn everyone against them. For me, this is all leading up to a Supernatural Brawl of Epic Proportions.

Which brings us to the shifters - Luna's alive! I'm pleasantly surprised. I'm enjoying Martha the Were Grandmama, she plays it so cool. Despite the fact that she raised an evil psychopath of a son, no doubt her house is the safest place for Emma. Isn't that how real life parenting decisions go down, too?

So it's some rednecks from Bon Temps, who know Hoyt, who are killing the shifters and some random vamps. Why do I think somehow the fae are behind this?

Your thoughts?

Is it just me, or are there no good TED talks?

Is it just me, or does everyone and their mom tend to get all "You've got to listen to this amazing TED talk!! Here's the link, you'll absolutely love it and be inspired by it!!" with you?

And I go, "Ok, [because I just love to waste time on the internets so much] let me listen to what the esteemed author of 'Eat, Pray, Douche' has to say about life."

So I give it a listen, and then I'm thinking "Wow, that sucked out loud." May I please get my wasted time back now?

I kind of want to swear off TED talks... but am wondering if there really are some worthwhile gems somewhere in TEDland. Anyone care to talk me out of it?

True Blood S5:E5 recap

This season has finally hit its stride - I'm totally into it now. (Though DH has actually stopped watching.)

"Boot and Rally" was this episode's name - aw, Sookie, I feel like you have your mojo back. It's so refreshing to see you in a decidedly non-damsel in distress role for a change! She kicked some serious ass at the haunted sanitorium of doom. Her speech before they all went into the abandoned hospital -- where clearly nothing good can ever happen -- reminded me of the best parts of the Scream movies, with the funny/pithy horror movie rules. Nice touch. Anyone else notice the admiring way Eric was gazing at Sookie when she went in first and told everyone to go for it? Eric has a thing for bravery in human women (Madam Pam's desirability comes to mind.)

The whole trip through the haunted sanitorium of doom was a great mix of the camp and the scary that TB usually does so well. Was anyone else concerned that they didn't immediately get those poor people down from the hooks?

I predicted Sookie was not going to actually do the deed with Alcide (at least not this time), and I also feel the need to point out that Alcide did not do the whole "narrate what Sookie's home is smelling like" thing after she vomited on his shoes. The other odd thing I found myself was thinking was, if she did happen to have sex with Alcide, would she have the proper birth control given she's never really needed it before?

The other highlight of this ep was the initial exchange between Tara and Jessica over the bar at Fangtasia. That was like the vampire version of the "It Gets Better" videos. Go Jessica. Then things all went to pot. I could not believe Tara fed on Hoyt, after telling him to go home to his mama. And that she did it right in the bathroom stall next to her only real vampire friend? And then they fought over it. WTF?

I think Luna is dead. I think Sam will live. Who is trying to kill all the shifters? Next season's villian(s), that's who!

So was it Nora or Salome who dug up Russell Edgington?

How will Lafayette exorcise the blue brujo who tried to kill Sookie? He didn't need to say that when he ran into his living room. I loved the scene with Lafayette's mom and Jesus's talking head, and the little talking religious icons Lafayette smashed into his carpet. Yikes.

Your thoughts?

Burger King's Bacon Sundae

When I heard about the new Bacon Sundae "available for a limited time only" at Burger King, of course I had to go try it.

Because bacon is delicious.

Don't gag.

And yes, I do dine on the swine.

So I parted with my $2.23 and was handed a ginormous hot fudge and caramel vanilla sundae with a huge piece of bacon standing straight up in the middle of it, with lots of other big pieces of bacon in it.

My first thought was: only in America.

My second thought: Is this gross or genius?

My 66-year-old dad and my 4-year-old son were with me that day, and we all tried it.

For my money, I enjoyed it. I've had bacon desserts in trendy restaurants this year, so I am open-minded about adding the bacony goodness to the sweet. They should have torn the bacon into smaller pieces, and mixed it in more thoroughly, and then added more chocolate and caramel sauce. BTW, this is something that would be very easy to make at home if you had all the ingredients on hand.

My son wanted nothing to do with the bacon - he just wanted the chocolate sauce.

My dad was laughing hysterically, and almost refused to eat it. Then he tried it.... and loved it. The mix of the salty and the sweet took him by surprise. He also thought it was probably a good way for the restaurant to recycle their unused bacon. LOL.

Anyone else actually tried it and care to weigh in? Or is the very idea just far too horrifying for the locavores?

True Blood S5:E4 recap

Who knew that fairies like to party like Cirque du Soleil and "Moulin Rouge" just got together and had a baby?

"Jason, the vampires killed your parents!" ... "Be quiet, Hadley!" ... BWAH HA HA HA HA!!!

I bet whichever vampire Sookie "finally" ends up with will turn out to be the one who offed her mom and dad, in yet another shocking act of betrayal. Beel or Eric?

Did anyone else think the peeping tom scene with Beel and Eric watching through Sookie's window was kind of hot? I bet they'll interrupt before Alcide can close. Which is a shame, because I thoroughly enjoyed watching the two of them make out on her couch -- thanks, of course, to Sookie's fruit-flavored liquid confidence. One minor criticism though. Must Alcide constantly announce what he's smelling in Sookie's home, at each and every opportunity? Hey Sookie, your kitchen smells like ammonia on top of bleach! Hey Sookie, you smell like mint and peaches! We get it - he's a canine and yes, they're blessed with an extraordinary sense of smell.

I should have been more disturbed by Alcide's caring but major lie to the Pelts, but I understood his reasoning and can see the rough justice of it. Although, come on - even when the body is found, there's simply no way Sookie would ever go to jail. A white woman in the South shooting an armed intruder in her own home? Please.

Vampire Tara is finally growing on me because at long last she is starting to act like her old whip smart self again, instead of a zombie fucktard. Loved the feeding scene with Pam and the blood donor. I also loved the scene where Eric released Pam. She's a maker now. I was so sure Pam wasn't going to rescue Tara from the tanning bed - I guess that maker/progeny connection is strong.

Who killed Sam's attractive shifter friends?

There are traitors in The Authority, and Roman will take them out with his super biblical stake! Gross.

Um, Lafayette's blue brujo alter ego tried to kill Sookie by messing up the brakes in her drivable lemon. Not much seems to be made of it.

Your thoughts?

A Happy, State Dept Parent's Response to Slaughter

Came across this great Slaughter response from Dana Shell Smith, a globetrotting bigwig in Foreign Service at the US State Department, titled "How to Have an Insanely Demanding Job and 2 Happy Children."

And what I want to say is A-fucking-men, sister. Tell it!

To me, Shell Smith's Both/And message of "With a lot of ingenuity and hard work, it can be done and your family can be happy" rings a whole hell of a lot truer than Slaughter's Either/Or message of "Despite my wealth, my family wouldn't make the arrangements that are necessary to have this particular job and make us all happy, so therefore no one else in the whole wide world can either."

Not to worry, Shell Smith's piece is much shorter than Slaughter's - in fact, you can read it in under 5 minutes. Dare I say, it is even almost as good as what most of my regular commenters could have written while half-asleep. ;) Yes, Atlantic editors, that's me taking a shot at you again.

Here's a flavor of the raison d'être for Shell Smith's response:

In conversation after conversation, my colleagues and I puzzled over why Dr. Slaughter's experience had so contrasted with ours. Was it because she had tasted another life, that of an academic who had a level of control over her schedule that we could not even imagine? Was it because she tried out government work while living in a different city from her family?

Regardless of why our experiences differed so greatly, I was left thinking not only about my own experience, but about the responsibility we women have to create change by introducing a different environment for the younger, more junior officers -- both male and female -- whether in government or elsewhere. After a stream of officers in the bureau I lead stopped in to tell me that they wished I would weigh in, I decided to add some of my thoughts and experiences to the conversation.

Bingo.

One thing about the reaction to this piece has struck me. That Shell Smith and her husband haven't seen a non-animated movie in the theatre in the last 10 years has apparently managed to make some people on the internets sad. But I say to each their own (obviously.)

Look folks, whether we choose to admit it or not, most (but certainly not all, insert privilege disclaimer here) of us are actually making time for the things that are truly the most important things to us. How do you spend most of your time? Then that's your actual priority right there. Ok, now consider my already dead horse yet again beaten. Honestly, what's so "sad" about a couple's filmgoing hobby taking a backseat to their family and careers for awhile? I'm sure they'll once again throw away their hard-earned cash at the cineplex when the kids are older! Can anyone ever win on the internets? Sheesh.

What I'm trying to say here is that Shell Smith's perspective is shared across many industries. My friend the successful surgeon and mother could have written this. And in my old corporate line of work, this is how the higher ups all make it work. Work and family are the top priorities. Friendships, hobbies, perhaps they're not as much of a priority, but they are also not entirely absent either. Take exercise for example - it often gets a lot of short shrift amongst this set. There's a reason you hear about people hitting the gym at 4:30am if fitness is a true priority.

They're happy to live like this. Really and truly. They're also telling the truth.

We all need to accept that not everyone shares our personality type. Not everyone likes the same things you do. We all define the term "priority" so very differently. The popularity of Ugg boots and the Kardashians are living proofs of that one for me. But I don't go around getting sad that not everyone is prioritizing downhill skiing and reading like my family does.

Hit me with your best shot...

To Say Something or Not

What is the proper way to address the following situation in which I find myself?

Last October, a friend with a 3-year-old son took my (solicited) advice to visit the Montessori my children attend and sit in on a class (sans her son). I should mention that in general this friend likes to spend A LOT of time in her child's classrooms and to actively participate in any activity he is in, and she also was secretly hoping the Montessori would offer her a teaching position.

After her visit, she vented to me that she did not feel the Montessori teachers paid her enough personal attention while class was in session, but the lead teacher spent an hour with her afterwards, alone, talking and answering her many questions. She is very extroverted and really likes to be the center of attention. Friend also expressed to me that she was shocked that my 4-year-old son did not stop what he was doing and run over to give her a hug when she got to class. Nevermind that in the first place, it is not in his personality to do so. At. All. And he doesn't know her very well. I just thought to myself whatever, why this person ever thought a drop off Montessori where it's not about parental involvement would be a fit for HER personality is beyond me. A grown adult feels sad because someone else's 4-year-old child did not validate her needs? I thought it was all quite silly. Moving on....

To yesterday. There are summer classes at Montessori and she actually enrolled her child in one (which I couldn't believe given how much she disliked her visit). My kids are not in this particular class. On the second day of class (BTW she personally sat through all of it and not shockingly her 3-year-old was not super well behaved), she stayed after and communicated all of the above about her feelings last October to the lead teacher, and he was understandably... uh, surprised. And annoyed.

So at pick up from the later class yesterday, the teacher pulls me aside to process the stuff she has dropped on him. She does not understand the Montessori method but seems to think she does because she attended one as a child (and we all know the "Montessori" label does not always mean exactly what we think it means). I'm on his side, and we basically agreed that every parent has their own journey and that while this Montessori can't be all things to all people, those of us who leave our kids there are extremely happy with it. Someone who wants to be that close to their child at all times probably needs to explore another educational model. I mean, duh right.

I'm torn between saying something to this friend or just letting it go (again).

My main feeling is I don't want to have myself or my child involved in someone else's problem. Would a conversation alleviate my feeling or annoy me further? But OTOH, perhaps some boundary work is in order. "I like you, but don't bring me and mine into what are clearly your issues!" This friend and I have a decent enough relationship that I think I could say just about anything without consequence.

What would you do?

Nora Ephron has died

This morning's news has unexpectedly hit me right in the gut. Nora Ephron has died.

It can't be possible.

I had been meaning to blog about how only just this year I've discovered the pleasure of her writing, namely her poignant and hilarious book of essays, "I Remember Nothing: And Other Reflections."

In her gem of book, there's this fantastic little piece about salt, of all things, and how there's never enough of the correct, old school kind of salt at good restaurants anymore. (Here it is online, actually.) I liked it so much I sent a copy to a foodie friend of mine only a few weeks ago.

And her story in there defending the honor of her WOH mother at a time when few women of her kind did that is just so sweet and priceless.

My favorite Nora Ephron story is how she used to be married to Carl Bernstein of Watergate journalists Woodward and Bernstein fame. He cheated on her when she was pregnant and raising an infant son. Her response was the correct one - divorce his ass, then write a bestselling book about it called "Heartburn," which later became a movie starring Meryl Streep as her and Jack Nicholson as him. Well played, Nora.

Which reminds me that Ask Moxie recommended "Heartburn" awhile back. In the midst of a divorce herself, she called it the best book she'd ever read. Though it may not speak to me as it would to someone experiencing divorce firsthand, I definitely need to read that someday, too.

It also cracks me up that back when her ex was still keeping Deep Throat's identity a secret for many years, Nora Ephron apparently took every opportunity to publicly out Mark Felt as Deep Throat. Like she'd be giving a speech and would just say it: "Mark Felt is Deep Throat. Good night." How the press ignored such a delicious scoop is far beyond me.

Rest in peace, Nora Ephron.

True Blood S5:E3 recap

I stand corrected. This season doesn't suck quite as much as I had previously thought.

{SPOILERS, duh}.

Fairies!!

The good smelling man with 16 sisters was totally Claude. How do I know? I've read all the books. The end credits told me so. One problem though: he's not nearly good looking enough to be Claude (of the books anyway). Is there really a shortage of male models who want to act? Come on, people!

Are these fairies going to come back for Andy Bellefleur? Remember the pretty brunette fairy he had sex with in the woods a while back? I think Holly's Halloween costume fairy wings that we're still seeing in this season are a bit of foreshadowing. Hmm...

We've learned Jason has a hole in his soul that only sex can fill... because his high school teacher banged him, and after a quickie reunion with her he has just found out he does not like it, and it was wrong. I mean, clearly, Jason's got some fae blood attraction thing going on that makes everyone want to drop trou around him.

Jessica is a cool chick. Way to have Jason's back with that saleslady in the dressing room, and to set aside her raging vamp libido to be a real friend.

Loved the story of Pam's making. It makes her insecurities about Eric much more understandable, given she basically forced him into this eternal relationship and didn't wait to see if he were truly willing. Kind of like the vampire equivalent of a fake pregnancy in the 1950s.

I enjoyed Lorena's cameo, with Out-of-control Young Vampire Beel. Dead, mutilated prostitutes explained. How did I not see that coming? And Human Pam even asked to be paid back. Badass.

The Authority. Did anyone else think S&M when they hooked Beel and Eric up to those strappy black insta-stakers?

She's THAT Salome. Oh. She uses her sexual prowess to figure out vampires' true motivations. And it supposedly works? Does this mean Beel loves Sookie and Eric just loves himself? Also, I don't think Nora made a true confession, I think she was trying to protect Eric.

"The New Nan Flanagan" was funny.

Tara turning to Sam in her time of need was interesting. When Sookie confronted him my first thought was, why would anyone try to lie to a known mindreader? I think Sam was right - Sookie and Lafayette's decision to turn her makes total sense. They bought her some more time to settle her affairs and to actually choose her destiny. So I don't understand her crazed anger. And I think Tara is actually smarter than the way she's being portrayed. A tanning bed? You'd think Tara would know by now how to actually kill a vampire in a surefire way: beheading or staking. Duh.

Where's Jesus? Lafayette's reflection in the kitchen at Merlotte's and the bizarre bleach in the gumbo incident suggest that Jesus is still here, along with the dark brujo magic.

Sookie finally has Real People troubles. Lafayette was right: she should have just called the police (because she's white, after all.) Seeing Debbie Pelt's parents searching for answers strangely put me on their side. Alcide was understandably pissed. Of course he's not going to tell anyone, he seems pretty dog loyal. ;)

Your thoughts?

Dissent of the Year - Slaughter's "Why Women Still Can't Have It All"

Given the recent mothering critiques/shit-shows/desperate attempts to generate page views in mainstream print media, I had largely given up on hoping to find the answers to life anywhere in those once-prominent but now largely-irrelevant magazines my parents used to subscribe to back in the day.

It's exceptionally rare that I come across a piece I flat out do not agree with in many ways, but enjoyed reading anyway. Anne-Marie Slaughter's July cover story in The Atlantic Why Women Still Can't Have It All should have rubbed me the wrong way. The title alone makes me want to vomit in my mouth a little bit - my knee jerk reaction being so where's that cover story on "Why MEN Can't Have It All" - oh wait, they can. Thanks, Patriarchy! She never once directly mentions patriarchy, and it can't be that she's never heard of it. I think her silence as to "patriarchy" alongside her descriptions of the way "men and women are socialized differently" means she basically gets it, but is choosing not to sound too feministy in the hope of appealing to a mainstream audience, perhaps, perhaps...

Slaughter offers up her own musings on the challenges of having a high-profile government career and parenting her 14- and 12-year-old sons the way she wants to. Note we are not talking about Good Enuf Mothering here; she strikes me as an unacknowledged uber-Type A parent (maybe ESTJ-type?) who demands excellence in all areas of her life. My own mom is a bit like that, so let's just say I know them when I see them. I'll admit this aspect was enlightening to me - I'd always assumed the demands are greatest with infants/toddlers/preschoolers (especially those trying 3.5 year olds) and that parenting gets easier with time and the child's independence. Turns out some young teenagers might actually need their mothers and/or some mothers might feel the need to reprioritize their work lives to spend more time with their 14-year-olds who are suddenly having some school issues and are not talking to anyone. Or it could be an overreaction to the normal mini-rebellions of the young teen phase - I'm sure Slaughter will get some pushback on the internets for it. That's what happens when you put yourself out there, I suppose.

She misses the mark where she overgeneralizes and projects her preferences and in/abilities on to all women, everywhere but also seems to acknowledge that's precisely what she's doing. Slaughter's personal narrative covers loads of familiar territory, and at first does not seem to be offering anything new that has not already been said a million times at those tired old corporate work/life balance panels. If you can stomach the crappy title, give it a read. She gets it right when she critiques the way our work culture is oriented today. Progressives like me will appreciate her suggestions that should allow for less face time, more telecommuting, school sessions that match the reality of the schedules of working families, and better day care options. She also gets the educated/rich privilege angle and explores it (briefly) in a way that doesn't annoy me.

It's a looong article, and I kept saying to myself whenever she mentioned the logistical tedium of dry-cleaning, and running kids to weekend events, etc "Why couldn't she hire someone to help solve this problem?" They're called Personal Assistants. And Babysitters Who Can Drive. She's rich and educated and feels she has enough knowledge of the topic to opine about it in a national publication under her real name, after all? So why not simply avail herself of those solutions? Clearly this is my own bias coming out. Yeah, yeah, I'm making big assumptions about her family's income level. Perhaps I'm just not getting it. I've definitely been accused of that before.

Your thoughts?

True Blood S5:E1&2 recap

Season 5 of True Blood is already two episodes in, and I almost did not do a recap. Truth be told, I think this season sucks. (But of course I'll keep watching.)

And it so very badly pains me to say that. I want to love this show that has been near and dear to my heart since 2008.

Right now, I'm just not feeling it.

Don't get me wrong. There are a couple of things I'm really digging, namely {SPOILERS} - all things Pam, Terry Bellefleur's fiery Iraq backstory, and Disgusting Russell Edgington making a comeback. That's about it though.

I could say a lot about what is So Very Wrong this season, but I think I'll be brief:

1) Vampire Tara = hell to the no. As she trashed Sookie's home and perched maniacally on the kitchen sink, I thought to myself, well is she or isn't she "fucktarded"? And I still don't have the answer to that question, even though I should. Ugh.

2) Jason Stackhouse keeping it in his pants/trying to develop a conscience. Um, no.

3) Eric banging his "sister." Eew. And they have absolutely no chemistry. Yep, I said it.

4) The Authority/Lilith-worship/there's even a vampire Bible - wait, who cares? They finally drew the curtains back and are showing us The Authority they've been mentioning for the last several seasons. Not impressed. Not scary. Seems like a missed opportunity.

5) Hoyt. Nobody believes you're really that pissed off.

6) Alcide. That scene in Sookie's kitchen was weird. I'm having a very hard time seeing him as a potential Sookie love interest. And the fact that Sookie was about to confess to killing Debbie until Lafayette suddenly ran downstairs and shut her up? No. Just no.

What are your thoughts on Season 5 so far?

Summer Staycation

I'm taking a week off from blogging because enjoying my summer needs to take priority, but I just wanted to say a few things...

True Blood premieres this Sunday, June 10th!!! And I'm so happy about it. IRL, A-Paq is preggers, isn't that neat? Vampires really can impregnate the living. ;)

This season of Mad Men ends on Sunday. Wow. It's been quite a ride. Everyone's been talking about Joan and Lane, but I've been most drawn to Peggy and Ginsburg. Hell of a season.

When I get back, we'll discuss further.

And also Game of Thrones, because it has given me some things to process.

Ta ta!

Yesterday I Held A Newborn Baby

My local friend, Stitch, gave birth yesterday to her third child. She texted me the baby's name and nice healthy measurements, along with a picture of her and her 3 kids sitting on their hospital bed. (Yep, most people seem to text and FB their birth announcements these days instead of making phone calls and then sending formal paper cards.)

Interestingly, I could not immediately tell from the names nor from the picture whether Stitch's new baby was a girl or boy. I was pretty delighted about that fact, actually, because I knew I would get to walk into the room and receive the news right there, in person. Of course, Stitch had no idea that she has herself a gender ambiguously-named baby. And I'll take my hatred of her name choices to my grave. Let me assure you, it's the names themselves I can't abide, not the fact of their gender ambiguity.

I walked in thinking to myself this baby is probably a boy, but no - she's a girl! And she's just perfect. And very fun to hold. And for the first time I can remember, I am not possessed of a single shred of womb wistfulness. I was pretty sure (95%-ish) before, but now I'm positive: I don't want any more babies of my own. Sometimes life has a funny way of making us certain of things.

Elizabeth Warren: I believe you

I've been following the Elizabeth Warren brouhaha and now that I've finally collected my thoughts, it's time to blog about it.

Long controversy short: Warren is a biracial and phenotypically White woman who is running for the Senate. She is also a tenured Harvard Law professor who became famous in recent years for her role as a kickass consumer rights advocate with the Obama Administration. In the 90s, she once elected to self-identify as an American Indian while applying for a faculty job at HLS. Based upon her family oral history while growing up in Oklahoma, she self-identifies as 1/32nd Cherokee Indian, which incidentally happens to be the same blood quantum as that of Bill John Baker, the current head of the Cherokee Nation.

Now that she's in Politics, the Identity Police are gunning for her because she apparently looks too White to be a "real" Indian. Folks in respectable publications are saying she has "claimed in error to be a member of a minority group." People are accusing Warren of having benefited from being a minority on paper without having to suffer any of the burdens in her real life - an argument I understand but absolutely do not agree with.

Here are my thoughts: Elizabeth, I believe you.

1. This debate would be non-existent if Warren did not look White, but instead "looked Indian" or at least "looked like a minority" (apart from having high cheekbones) according to our larger society (i.e. more like the Cleveland Indians' racist mascot?)

2. I see nothing wrong with Elizabeth Warren saying she's an American Indian. Or not. Or with her choice to self-identify differently in different contexts. One need not be an enrolled member of a federally-recognized tribe, nor meet the supposed "Indian" looks criteria of Central Casting to be able to legitimately identify as a "real" American Indian. There are plenty of "real" Indians who have been kicked out of their tribes, not to mention the sad history of forced assimilations. And yes, folks can pass for White and still be Indians. Period. End of story.

3. It may be there are folks out there who "check the box" for whom active racial discrimination is not their lived reality. This does not mean that affirmative action serves no purpose, or is not working, it merely means it is imperfect tool. But so far no one has a better, more cost-effective tool for dismantling White supremacy (short of ending Legacy preferences in higher ed admissions, but I digress).

4. We all get to choose how we racially self-identify. If we throw Warren under the bus, we'll have to ask ourselves: Are we prepared to start telling people when they may or may not identify as a member of a racial group? Do we really want to go back to the One Drop Rule?

5. The suggestion that Warren was either lying or unethical when she self-identified as American Indian because she supposedly has not suffered the prejudice common to the group suggests an exercise in Identity Policing I am not at all comfortable with.

6. What's next - make everyone submit to genealogical DNA testing a la Henry Louis Gates's delightful TV program? My own test results would be a mix of Caucasian, Asian, and American Indian. I look like a less attractive Mariah Carey - Whites generally think I'm Caucasian, sometimes Asians see me as Asian. My kids can claim membership in all those racial groups plus Latino. I don't want anyone but them choosing how they themselves get to self-identify.

That's all.

Your thoughts?

Infant Adoption on Short Notice

Wow. My BFF2, who recently underwent successful cancer treatment on top of an unsuccessful, 5-year-long fertility struggle, just found out yesterday that her and her DH's dream is about to come true. They are going to be able to adopt a healthy, 4-month-old little boy via a private adoption. Happy Mother's Day indeed!

Little dude will be there in one week. Hallelujah, but also OMG. This is the shortest notice of an adoption I've ever heard of (obviously, the legal aspects will officially take much longer, not to mention the risk of the teen biomom changing her mind...). But they're optimistic, and have to proceed as though it's happening.

BFF2's DH emailed everyone with kids asking what to buy? How to prepare? Holy cow, HELP?!

What have you got, readers? (I made a short list, I'll post mine after hearing some of yours.)

Happy Mother's Day!!!!

Communication Breakdown, non-profit edition

Went to a very uncomfortable local non-profit board meeting last night, and am thanking my lucky stars that my term on this board is up at the end of the month. While the connections I've made there have been helpful to my own business (hurrah), I'm so glad to be done with it. Long story short, among other community projects, this board oversees a preschool, and the discussion last night was whether and how to find a new teacher for this preschool because the current one showed her ass recently.

Actually, come to think of it, this is an exemplar of Podunkville culture, so I should give some more details.

I've met this preschool teacher a few times and am not a fan. She has a passive aggressive style, and is a horrendously poor communicator. She also lacks some of the basic certifications that other local preschool teachers have, and is therefore not someone I personally would have hired, but I digress.

At last month's board meeting, the teacher came to the board and epically "kitchen sinked" the room - screaming and crying for nearly an hour about how she has been unhappy for the last 2 years but until that night she had never once said anything about it and she had been asked countless times. She isn't sure she wants to continue teaching all 4 classes anymore, and she went on about how her mom came to one of the classes with her and told her "these families are taking advantage of you" and she suddenly left, in tears, before the board could finish responding. With only 6 weeks left in the school year, she sent a rude mass email to the school community ordering families not to arrive even a minute early, and that once class was over everyone needs to leave the school immediately so she could prepare for the next class arriving 2 hours later - nevermind if a mother needs to sit down and finish nursing her baby - they can "go to the coffeeshop down the street" (in direct violation of the awesome state law protecting the rights of nursing mothers in places of public accommodation.) Naturally, the preschool community feels really alienated by the shitty way she chose to air these concerns that have clearly been bothering her for so long. My conclusion is she is someone who just doesn't get it. Compounding this, she is in her 30's and this is her first full-time paying job after college. I get the sense that she lacks the personal and work experience that would allow her to distinguish between mountains and molehills. Privately, I was left wondering if she could benefit from a psych consult - she seemed unhinged and I felt sad for her.

Why does this person still have a job? One of the positive and negative things about Podunkville culture is that people in authority are afraid to be assholes, and firings of "nice" people - even those who break the law - happen in only the most extreme cases, and after a lot of rumination. It's a culture that makes change hard. Maybe it is also like this elsewhere, but having lived only in larger cities before, this is the first place I've encountered it.

Anyway, I feel awful for the families who are now wondering if it will be ok to leave their kids with her.

Gah. This is why I want to teach my kids effective communication skills - so they can learn how to speak their truth and to constructively problem solve in a way that doesn't poison relationships.

Anyone ever been there, done that?

Summer Reading

I bet I can already guess which book everyone at the airport, on the train, and sitting by the pool will be reading this summer. Though, due to its subject matter, it may be well hidden inside an e-reader. This one is a trilogy (shocker). Any guesses? My own prediction is after the jump.

Last summer, it seemed like everyone was reading "The Hunger Games." The summer before that, everyone was reading "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" and its progeny. And before that, "Twilight." (Me? I liked the movies so much better than the books - I didn't even finish "GWTDT" because to me it was begging for some serious condensing, and the violence was too much. I didn't finish "Twilight" because if I'm going to be reading about vampires, I need to be reading about them having wild sex. As for "HG," if I were Katniss I would have had sex with movie Gale looong before those games even started. Run the risk of dying a virgin? Hell to the no. Not after spending so much time alone in the woods with that fine piece. Hard to suspend my disbelief on that one. Where was I? ...)

I want to inquire about your reading habits. How do you decide what you're going to read for pleasure?

I do it two ways: 1) I keep a list of books I want to read, and 2) I'm in two shitty book clubs and I actually do the reading. Also, I only read real books - I don't have an e-reader (not that e-books aren't "real"). Open to conversion someday. Just not now. I use my local public library constantly, and I have my book list uploaded there. They send me an email when something from my list is in. I could also elect to have them mail it to me. They have a drive through book drop. Heaven. They also do e-books, so I can painlessly make the switch someday.

Personally, I don't divide the literary world into "kid stuff" and "adult stuff." I try to remain open to suggestion, and I'll read anything. I won't necessarily finish everything though. But I will give it a fair shake for 75 pages. I'm sure you've heard how Joel Stein caught hell for poking fun at grown-ups who read young adult fiction here:

"I have no idea what “The Hunger Games” is like. Maybe there are complicated shades of good and evil in each character. Maybe there are Pynchonesque turns of phrase. Maybe it delves into issues of identity, self-justification and anomie that would make David Foster Wallace proud. I don’t know because it’s a book for kids. I’ll read “The Hunger Games” when I finish the previous 3,000 years of fiction written for adults."

His brief commentary inspired quite a little debate on the internets. Funny how people think he is "wrong" for having his own personal boundaries about what he will and will not read. I think we all have the right to get irrational when it comes to our opinions on books. Anyway, I love that reading stirs such passion in the American public. Gives me hope for our future.

Summer 2012 reading prediction time.....

I predict everyone will be reading "Fifty Shades of Grey." I understand it's basically "Twilight" fan fiction about S&M. In the last 2 weeks, this book has been recommended to me several times, by some very straight-laced folk. One of my shitty book clubs just added it to our reading list. (This review has inspired me not to read it - be sure to read the comments, there is some damn clever writing in there, too. And this critique is hilarious.)

Instead, I think my inaugural 2012 summer read is going to be a little gem described by a friend I trust to be an underrated classic - "The Dud Avocado." What are your summer reading plans?

New To Me Songs

11 Songs New To My iPod

"No Cars Go" - Arcade Fire
"Helena Beat" - Foster the People
"Two Weeks" - Grizzly Bear
"We Are Young" - Fun. (featuring Janelle Monae)
"Somebody That I Used To Know" - Gotye (featuring Kimbra)
"Gold On The Ceiling" - The Black Keys
"Rocket" - Goldfrapp
"11th Dimension" - Julian Casablancas
"Uprising" - Muse
"Seventeen" - Ladytron
"Spitting Games" - Snow Patrol

What songs are you enjoying these days?

Dear Arizona, You suck.

Oh Arizona, are you fucking kidding me with this? After we've already been through the first 8 circles of hell with all of this nonsense, thanks to your elected officials? Not to mention the fact that one of them could have been our current president.

By late July, within your state borders, life officially begins on the last day of a woman's menstrual period. As in over a week before sperm meets egg. As in even before some subset of future parents will have met each another. As in a virgin could be pregnant.

I need a drink.

Somebody please tell me why crazy ass legislation like this is not front page news, but the current national parenting non-versation Just. Won't. Go. Away. No, actually, don't. Just pass me that drink please.