No Good Reason

The longer I parent, the less I try to judge other parents. I mean, it's a common joke among parents that we were all much better parents before we actually had children. My kids were going to snack on organic fruit, not watch television until they were four and never hear yelling.

Whoops.

I do feed them organic fruit, they just don't voluntarily snack on it. And I resolve not to yell every single day. . . which sometimes works. And there are certain days when Ironflower and Lovebug are so busy that they don't have time to watch T.V. When I get tempted to judge other parents, I think about what a pregnant-with-Ironflower-me would say about my current parenting and I shut that criticism down.

Usually.

At the pool last summer. The 7 year old in an appropriate tankini. 

At the big kids' swimming class last week, I spotted  a girl of about 4 wearing a string bikini. 

Similar to this:

From Babikini

Except the back part did not have as much coverage and "Diva" was spelled out in rhinestones across it. 

The little girl kept tugging at the suit as she walked, like it was giving her a wedgie. Which it probably was, because string bikinis aren't made for swimming classes. 

I don't even think they should be made for four year olds. While (obviously) only pedophiles would find a four year old in a tiny string bikini sexy, the entire point of string bikinis is to be sexy. There's a reason that all those fabulously-bodied Olympic swimmers don't wear string bikinis when they are competing or practicing. In fact, anyone who likes to actually swim probably doesn't wear string bikinis. 

String bikinis are for posing. Sexily.

Which is fine. For people who are ready to be sex objects. And not preschoolers at their swimming lessons. 

Yes, I am totally judging the mother who put her child in a string bikini. Especially for swimming lessons. I've been trying to come up with a scenario where there's a good reason for this, but I can't. If someone gave me a string bikini for Ironflower, I would give it back. If Ironflower asked for one, I would tell her no. If I (magically) got my bikini body back and wanted us to having matching bikinis, I would find ones that were appropriate for both of us. 

The only thing I've come up with so far is that maybe the mom is actually a cast member from one of those "reality" Gypsy shows, where dressing provocatively is a requirement. Although since I can't even take photos of my own kids at swimming lessons, I doubt they're letting a reality show film on the pool deck. 

Nope. There's no good reason for a four year old to wear a string bikini. 

An Excuse For My Hypocrisy

When I was in the second grade, I started a letter writing campaign to demand that the movie "Grease" be given a 'G' rating, not a 'PG' one. I was kind of obsessed with "Grease" and it was painful to me that some of my classmates couldn't watch it because it was rated 'PG'. Or at least that's the excuse they gave. Now that I think about it, not very many of my second grade classmates grew up to be theater nerds with me in high school. Maybe they just couldn't appreciate a good musical.

 I didn't think a few swear words and a teen pregnancy storyline were bad for kids. I don't remember registering the liquor or smoking as a big deal either. As far as I was concerned, the singing and dancing were what really mattered. Though the clothes also intrigued me. I really wanted a Pink Lady jacket. And skintight black pants.* At 7, my crush on Olivia Newton-John was far bigger than my crush on John Travolta.

But this is not a post about Grease. ** It's about how I would rather my 7 year old not watch Grease.

And how I'm afraid that this makes me a total hypocrite/helicopter parent/idiot.

I mean, I don't even like her to watch iCarly. We used to use Led Zeppelin to soothe her and now. . . I'm sheltering her from a movie I watched when I was 7? I still let her listen to Led Zeppelin - or any other music she wants. I don't think hearing lyrics she won't understand is going to mess her up.

But seeing a story, well, this is a kid who has always acted out her favorite TV shows and movies. It's not that I think she's going to turn into Rizzo or that girl from St. Bernadette's. But I don't want her acting out scenes from this movie on the playground. Or even thinking so much about all the romantic drama that goes on in that movie, nevermind the other stuff that happens.

If you had asked me at 8 or 11 or 14 what I thought was supposed to happen in romantic relationships, I would have described Sandy's plot line from Grease. This was not a good set up for teenage dating. The lesson I wish I had learned was that if he suddenly starts acting like a jerk, he's a jerk. He's not going to change his ways because he loves you so much, like Danny did for Sandy.***

At this point, my daughter views boys as potential playmates, not boyfriends. If she likes a boy, it's because he helped her build a fort. I feel like repeated viewings of Grease and other romance heavy shows are going to change that. I know that someday, of course, she will look at boys like boyfriends. Or girls like girlfriends, whatever. But why push her?

It's not like I'll never let her watch Grease or iCarly or Degrassi. Down the road I plan on forcing all the kids to watch Degrassi and 16 & Pregnant with me. And Grease. And Sixteen Candles. And Fame. I'm hoping these will be fun family occasions, but I suspect these viewings will actually occur when they are grounded.

So I'm not a total hypocrite. When I feel they are old enough (which is definitely not while they still work so hard to believe in Santa Claus) I will let them watch all kinds of PG and R rated material.

What about you? Is there a movie or a TV show that you watched that you won't let your kids watch? What's your philosophy on PG and R ratings?





*I finally understand some of the unfortunate fashion choices I made while clubbing in college.

**Although it could be. I still love that movie.

***Undoubtedly not all my teenage dating issues had to do with Grease, Sixteen Candles also shoulders some of the blame. And all the hours I watched All My Children with my babysitter probably didn't help.

Sitcom or Soap Opera?

Yesterday I had a sitcom moment. Something that happened was just so patently ridiculous that it belonged on a sitcom. A really bad sitcom, possibly starring Tim Allen and/or Jim Belushi.

I was in the swimming class observation area at the Y, which I think at least has the potential to be an SNL sketch, what with all the competimommies and screaming toddlers and older siblings resentfully doing their homework. Or possibly I just have low entertainment standards. Anyway, I was eavesdropping on the people on the bench in front me. 

I noticed her at first because of the tight low-waisted jeans. The average mom around here might have a rockin' body , but she doesn't display it at swim lessons (despite what The Real Housewives of New Jersey may have led you to believe). I assumed at first she was a nanny, which is why I started eavesdropping. Because in addition to the sexy jeans, she was touching the guy's arm a lot and tossing her hair. And if I can't have my own nanny, I might as well enjoy some possible nanny scandal, right? 

Schadenfreude. It's a tribute to my husband's German heritage. Like you've never felt it. 

Anyway, as I listened to their conversation, I realized she was a mom. A mom not married to the guy she was totally flirting with, whose own wife was apparently in the locker room with their kid. Just when I had convinced myself that some women are flirty with all men and it doesn't mean anything, she went straight into caricature mode. 

She stood. Then she leaned forward and wiggled her behind while she seemed to be picking something up. The view for the guy (and me, unfortunately sitting behind him) was sort of like this: 

But with wiggling. 

Then she looked back and grinned at him. That's when I thought of Tim Allen. I could see this happening to him on one of his shows, this woman being such a one-dimensional vixen, and no one believing that she'd hit on him until they realized she'd hit on every guy in the show. Or something like that. 

I may have giggled out loud as she tossed her hair (again) and  turned to look at him. I don't know if it was the giggle or the guy's wife coming back that caused her to stand and start  acting like a real person again. 

A real person who glared at me. I wanted to say, "Hey lady, I'm not the one acting like a bad sitcom vixen!" But instead I stared at my phone screen like someone had just texted me something funny. As I watched her out of the corner of my eye (wouldn't you?), I saw her wink at the guy before he left. While she was talking to his wife. 

Maybe it was more like a soap opera than a sitcom, come to think of it. 

Although if they were already having some sort of affair, they would be more circumspect, wouldn't they? And she wouldn't be trying that hard, right? I mean, I never even tried that hard when I was single and in a club, unless I was really, really, really drunk and the guy was really, really hot. And then I don't think it ever worked. So what do I know? 

That sitcoms are meant to be exaggerated and ridiculous and the people at my Y shouldn't be, that's what. 

The Reading Bitch

Last night I watched the commercial for "Teach Your Baby To Read!", a product that teaches babies and toddlers to memorize the shapes on flashcards read. The urge I had to smack all those parents upside the head, well, it reminded me of my urges when I watch the kiddie pageant spectacle, Toddlers and Tiaras.

It's the same damn thing.

Poise, the ability to walk in high heels, reading. . .those are all great skills to have. Reading's obviously more important, but still. In our looks-obsessed society, the ability to wear lip gloss without it going all over your teeth can't be denied. But why the rush?

Four year olds don't need to look polished to do well at preschool.

And babies don't need to be able to read. And, in fact, they aren't actually reading. Sure, I saw them say the words on the cards, or gesture to indicate that they knew what the word was. But that's not actually reading. They didn't decode (aka "sound out") the word and they sure as hell didn't comprehend its meaning from the surrounding text.

I've taught lots of kids to read and I guarantee that none of them would have read for real any more quickly had they memorized the words for body parts as babies. If their parents had talked to them more, read them more stories and/or not let them spend all night watching horror movies, that might have helped. But this stupid program? Not so much.

A colleague once referred to me as "The Reading Bitch", that's how into teaching reading I was. I might have been a little militant. I might have distributed timelines and scopes and sequences and lesson plans to my elementary school teacher colleagues a little obsessively.

And yet my baby has no idea what letters even are. But I have gotten him to sit still long enough to finish listening to "Touch and Feel Farm". I'm kinda proud of that. Because it's age-appropriate.

I suppose in a world where first graders have cell phones and grandmothers attend Botox parties, age-appropriate isn't a very popular concept. Sure, everyone clucks over the pageant kids, made up and hairsprayed like teenage prom queens, but they still have their own shows. And I've yet to hear anyone talk about, much less criticize, "Teach Your Baby To Read".

The truth is, kids who memorize easily (or very early), often have a hard time reading more difficult text when they hit second or third grade. And forget about developing their thinking skills. Memorization does jack for those. But all those parents can now brag that their one year olds can read, which I guess is more imporant than age-appropriate or thinking.

Score another one for the assholes.