. a blogumn by Stephanie Myers Last week I was introduced to a phenomenon that bothers me more than a little bit and I’m not sure if it’s just me.  My son Aidan and I went over to the Children’s Playground in Golden Gate Park to enjoy the return of sunshine and balmy weather after a week of interminable rain and gray. While on the swings, I saw a boy, about 5, come out from a stand of trees that ran along the swings.  As his dad plopped him into the swing next to ours  I overheard his mother ask, “Did you go pee in the bushes?” in a way that one might ask “did you go in the potty?” They continued to remind their son that when he needed to go, he could just go….anywhere in the bushes. I was sure for a moment that I misheard.  I mean, I’ve only ever heard of this kind of thing twice before. Once in the movie Kids, and once in a novel.  One of my favorite books, The Nanny Diaries, touched on it when, during the mother-nanny hand-off at the park, the nanny asks the mom where the bathrooms are and the mom answers, “Oh, anywhere.” to the disbelief of the nanny. Now Aidan is in the middle of potty training, so I know what it’s like to be in desperate need of a bathroom. And yes, the closest bathroom to the Children’s Playground could stand to be closer.   However, it has never occurred to me for a single minute to tell my kid to go pee in the brush in public.  It’s never occurred to me that peeing outside is meant to be anything other than something you do on a long road trip...

A blogumn by Stephanie Myers A few weeks ago, when H and I were watching yet another report about the depressed economy and layoffs, I pointed out that H’s company (a prominent retail cosmetics company) should be pretty okay.  I told him about the “lipstick rule” – something I’d first learned about at a Mary Kay/Avon-esque cosmetics party.  The idea was simple: women will find ways to buy their favorite beauty products.  In some cases it could be something as small as a lipstick that they budget in to buy.  Yet that lipstick is more than a lipstick, it’s a way to feel beautiful and bring a little luxury into a budgeted lifestyle.  At the same cosmetics party (held after the dot-bomb dropped) one woman talked about her mother saving pin money for a her favorite face cream during the Depression.  I reasoned to H that his company might see a decline in sales but, if the Lipstick Rule held, it would probably not be so bad. Today H sent me an article today about the “Leading Lipstick Indicator“, a term coined by Estée Lauder chairman Leonard Lauder (aka The Lipstick Index) after he saw a very specific trend occurring during financially turbulent years.  During times like these most of us wouldn’t consider buying couture because it costs too damn much; an $8 lipstick at Walgreen’s hurts the wallet a whole lot less in comparison. “History can be our guide here. As a Harvard professor explains: “The decade of the Great Depression, cosmetic sales increased 25 percent.” After the downturn following Sept. 11, lipstick sales doubled.” What’s the lipstick indicator say right now?  As you might have guessed, lipstick sales have shot up 40% in the past few months in shades with price tags...

. A blogumn by Stephanie Myers Before you have kids, you often have a general idea of what you want your parenting philosophy to be.  After lots of careful thought, most of which is not based on any actual kid experience, you have definite ideas of how you want to raise your kids regarding everything from nutrition to television.  Having “The Talk” about the birds and the bees with my kids was something that I figured I wouldn’t have to think about doing for a few years yet, being that Jillian is 6 and Aidan is 3.  Now I’m not so sure. Jillian, like most little girls, loves all things Disney and, as a result, I became familiar with High School Musical, Hannah Montana, and the Cheetah Girls.  I’m fluent in Disney in a way you can only really understand if you have a little girl.  Perhaps that’s why I’m a little tweaked about the latest Disney scandal involving Cheetah Girls Adrienne Bailon and bottomless pictures meant for her fiancee which were stolen from her laptop last week.  If you don’t have kids, or if you are blissfully unaware of celebrity ‘news’, you might not know that this is far from the first time Disney has found its squeaky-clean stars in the middle of a scandal. Jillian was only 2 when the Vanessa Hudgens scandal blew up and the nude/semi-nude pictures of a very underage High School Musical star hit the fan.  The pics were apparently taken as a gift for her boyfriend Zac Efron.  Obviously, in light of the $80 million dollar haul HSM3 saw opening weekend, the scandal hasn’t had a lasting tarnish on the franchise or Hudgens. I personally am glad that Jillian isn’t into HSM (its got too many ‘kissy’...

. A blogumn by Stephanie Myers Junk Food Gets Suspended From Massachusetts’s Schools The topic of junk food in schools seems to appear on the radar once in a while, usually in response to some study or other, only to fade into semi-obscurity again with the new news cycle.  Now a change in school policy has brought the subject up again. Cupcake a school district in Massachusetts, apparently frustrated by parents sending kids off with candy and other less than healthy options for snack-time, has decided to ban any and all junk food from school grounds. I’m not sure how violators are to be punished, but somehow anything at all seems a bit much.  Zero tolerance for junk food?  Detention for bringing birthday cupcakes? I don’t mean to make light of the matter. Take a look at any school, any grade level, and you know that the alarms being raised about rising levels of childhood obesity are true. A large part of that responsibility lies with, of course, the parents.  For their part many schools took things into their own hands by, for instance, restocking vending machines with healthier options and making changes to cafeteria menus. (My daughter Jillian’s elementary school is among them) The Massachusetts district released the final draft of the new wellness policy and the guidelines include bans against food for parties of any kind, fund-raising events, and also from the snacks parents provide themselves. I personally tend to be more restrictive with my kids about candy and treats. My kids don’t have candy unless it’s Easter, Halloween, Christmas, or their birthday. They don’t drink soda. They don’t eat ice cream or cookies on a daily basis. My kids have grown up regarding treats as just that – treats …that are...

. a blogumn by stephanie myers i have to admit something.  i’m probably one of a handful of people left in america who has not watched the show jon and kate plus 8.  that doesn’t mean that i haven’t seen or heard a great deal about this family.   there are people who are apparently rabid fans of this show in a fanatical way that makes me wonder what the draw is to watching a mom wrangle that many children.  it seems, in a way, like other family train-wrecks being broadcasted on the air today (nanny 911, bridezilla, wife swap, supernanny) – it is fascinating in its own sheer craziness. having never seen the show outside of clips on cnn, commercials, etc, i dont know a lot about it.  from what i gather of the parents, they seem level-headed (or as level-headed as one can be when you have eight kids), loving, and kind….if a bit worn out. on headline news yesterday, an item ran about the protest being raised by A Minor Consideration (a non-profit, tax-deductible foundation that advocates for child stars founded by child-star-turned-lawyer. paul petersen) against the show for its commercialization of the children’s day to day lives. (the video after the jump is not great quality but you do get to see the story) for the past four years the family has been on television as tlc documents the day to day ups and downs of raising a set of twins and sextuplets.  as a mother i’m guessing you watch this show to…what? remind yourself that someone out there has it much, much, much tougher than you?  cause that’s what i was thinking as watched clips of the show via headline news. A Minor Consideration contends that the children are being...

. a blogumn by stephanie meyers “parents are suddenly saying ‘no’ and their kids are saying, ‘what do you mean?’ ” – robert d. manning; economist, rochester institute of technology; author of Credit Card Nation it would be a great understatement to say that money is on the minds of many, if not in our wallets. shocked at the pump, at the grocery store, and at the mall, my friends and i have been talking a lot more often about how to cut corners in places that don’t matter, so that we can afford the things that do and maybe, just maybe, the occasional really awesome treat. we’re driving the car much less than before, being much more watchful of the register at the grocery store, eating at home more often, and wondering about the future; and like every family with children we’re trying to figure out how to keep up without shorting the kids. we certainly aren’t alone. i’ve been reading more and more about how families are trying to keep up as the economy continues to free fall. on friday the New York Times wrote about how families are now trying to include kids in the discussion of family economics. born after the late 80’s economic crisis faced a boom economy, parents, faced a new economic landscape where they could afford to do better for their kids in every way. now as the economy grinds ever slower, children who aren’t too familiar with ‘no’ are hearing wallets zip closed. money was not a topic of discussion in my family in any open way. my father worked three jobs and at that time (growing up in a reagan/bush america) there wasn’t much left over. i didn’t get toys or non-essentials unless it was...

. A blogumn by Stephanie Myers According to Slate Magazine: The typical parent, when whacking a misbehaving child, doesn’t pause to wonder: “What does science have to say about the efficacy of corporal punishment?” If they are thinking anything at all, it’s: “Here comes justice!” … [S]cience…shows that corporal punishment is like smoking: It’s a rare human being who can refrain from stepping up from a mild, relatively harmless dose to an excessive and harmful one. Three cigarettes a month won’t hurt you much, and a little smack on the behind once a month won’t harm your child. But who smokes three cigarettes a month? To call corporal punishment addictive would be imprecise, but there’s a strong natural tendency to escalate the frequency and severity of punishment. —————- Now, I am not proud to say that I have spanked my children, Jillian and Aidan, on occasion, though I would never  think of striking them now. I just can’t see how it teaches them anything more than to be afraid. And I don’t count it amoung the tools i use as a parent. I think it stems from the fact that I was raised by a mom who crossed the line often, and I know first hand how easily things can escalate.  I don’t mean to disparage parents who feel that judicious use of corporal punishment is a helpful tool. But I do think that it’s hard to define what constitutes “judicious”.  I’m sure if you asked my mom today, she’d swear that she was totally justified and not violent. It’s also hard to tell a little boy why its wrong to hit kids on the playground when they do something “wrong,” and yet okay for adults to use hitting as a way to discipline....