Women’s invisible labor leaves them feeling empty, study finds. «Les personnes trisomiques nous rappellent que nous sommes tous vulnérables» Dear mama: You’re not doing it wrong, it’s just *that* hard. It’s amazing how the smallest thing can change your whole perspective on life. For me, it was the kind words of a stranger. I was leaving a mommy-and-me gym class, on my way to pick up my preschooler, holding my toddler by one hand and the carseat with my newborn in the other. I opened the door and my toddler made a bee-line for the parking lot—just slipped out of my hand and bolted. By some marvel of mama-power I was able to grab him before he got there, without dropping my newborn—but not without falling, tearing my pants and skinning both my knees. I just sat down on the sidewalk and cried. She knelt down next to me, put her hand on my back and said, “You’re not doing it wrong.
In that one moment, with my hair matted to my tear-soaked cheeks and searing pain shooting down my legs, she made me realize it wasn’t my fault. As mothers, we often start to believe that if something isn’t going right, that it’s our fault. And so, dear mama, I want to say loud and clear—it’s not your fault. Pregnant women don't learn about profound brain changes. IN THE WEEKS AFTER my first son was born, I squandered hours of precious sleep leaning over his bassinet to check that he was still breathing, or Googling potential dangers that seemed to grow into monstrous reality by the blue light of my smartphone. Among them: The lead paint my husband and I had discovered recently — a real but manageable risk — had turned our new home into a hazard zone. I cleaned our floors incessantly but still imagined a cartoonish cloud of poison dust following us as I carried the baby, so tiny and fragile, from room to room.
When the doctor screened for postpartum depression during my six-week checkup, she noted that my responses to the questionnaire were somewhat mixed though my score was within the normal range. She asked whether I had thoughts about harming myself or my child and, when I said no, she moved on. The way I saw it, motherhood made me feel this way, and I would be a mother forevermore. In truth, something very foundational had changed: my brain.
When You Want to Say, “Be Careful!” - Child and Nature Alliance of Canada. By Petra Eperjesi, Manager of National Programs “Be careful!” Saying (shouting) that can be such a knee-jerk reaction when we see kids doing something that we perceive as dangerous. Just today, as a group of students moved further away from us and towards the edge of a big, rocky slope, three adults began to shout it, almost in unison. Sometimes there is real reason for alarm. Sometimes there isn’t. Working out the difference between the two is itself a subject for another blog post (or five). But whether or not there is a high risk of injury at a given moment, what do we even mean when we say “Be Careful!”? In short, “Be careful!” Here, some ideas about what we might say instead of (or in addition to) “Be Careful!”
Play with Great Heights (i.e. tree climbing) “Stay focused on what you’re doing.” Play with Great Speeds (i.e. tag) I usually find that it’s not so much the speed that gets my inner alarm bell going as what/who might be tripped over or crashed into! Play with Harmful Tools. A Family-Friendly Policy That’s Friendliest to Male Professors - NYTimes.com. Baby Storm five years later: Preschooler on top of the world. By Jessica Botelho-UrbanskiStaff Reporter Mon., July 11, 2016 As a baby, Storm Stocker-Witterick drew attention from around the world. Now, as a 5-year-old, she’s more likely to be getting attention from her parents and siblings. When the Star first profiled Storm and her family in 2011, they turned heads the world over. Parents Kathy Witterick and David Stocker had decided not to publicly reveal the sex of their third child.
And nearly everyone had an opinion as to why that was right or wrong. The family endured “vitriolic” criticism, as Kathy puts it, but also gained a much stronger network of support. The Toronto-based couple wanted to let Storm decide in her own time what gender she wanted to identify with. Their eldest child Jazz, 10, explains the difference. “Sex is what is between your legs, and gender is what you think of yourself as a person,” says Jazz. Now 5-and-a-half years old, Storm confidently says her preferred pronoun is “she.” Jazz prefers the pronouns “she” and “her.” On Keeping Your Last Name. Feminism | Posted by Tanvi S on 12/23/2013 There are so many little things we do that unconsciously lock us into the mindset that women are inferior. There are of course the big things that cause inequality that we obviously need to change, like the wage gap and violence against women, for example. But I feel like we can’t truly be equal until we also abolish all of the little sexist traditions that are so common.
This can be anything from social conventions, like how men are expected to lead in dancing and pay for dates to the gendered way we use language, like calling a group of girls or a mixed group ‘guys’. One of these issues that may seem small in context but is actually impactful is the convention that dictates that straight women should change their last name when they marry men. The thing that baffles me most is that women change their name voluntarily.
My issue with women taking their partner’s last name is not solely about the history of ownership. Loading ... Leave a Reply. Cinquante-cinquante? Lorsque j’étais encore à l’université, mon père m’a demandé ce que je voulais avoir dans la vie. Réponse classique et légèrement convenue d’une vingtenaire : une carrière, un mari et des enfants. Réponse d’un paternel macho et pleinement de son époque : tu seras bonne en tout mais excellente en rien. J’ai retenu la leçon et j’ai fait une chose à la fois. Une carrière. Puis un enfant. Puis le mari. Mon père avait raison, j’ai sacrifié beaucoup sur le plan professionnel depuis l’arrivée de mon B, il y a dix ans. Je fais mon miel de tellement d’activités inavouables : chercher le nom des vagabondes qui poussent anarchiquement derrière la maison, admirer l’or des pots de mes confitures d’abricots, jaser avec « mon » brigadier scolaire préféré devant le métro Snowdon (quel sourire !)
Je suis reconnaissante pour tout ça et j’assume la réalité : j’ai emprunté le « mommy track » et suis demeurée pigiste. En avant toutes (et tous !) Homme rose ou homme rosse Descendre l’échelle par choix ?
L’union libre comme un saut dans le vide. Au-delà d’une saga judiciaire assaisonnée de montants faramineux (dont une pension alimentaire mensuelle de 34 000 $ pour trois enfants), la cause de Lola et d’Éric a braqué les projecteurs sur un mode de vie à deux populaire chez nous : l’union de fait. Des spécialistes croient d’ailleurs qu’il est temps de rouvrir le débat sur le droit familial québécois. Le 25 janvier dernier, la Cour suprême du Canada, dans un jugement divisé, a tranché : le régime juridique du Québec en matière d’union de fait satisfait aux exigences constitutionnelles. Selon le tribunal, il n’est donc pas discriminatoire que Lola n’ait ni pension alimentaire pour elle-même de la part d’Éric, ni accès au patrimoine familial, malgré sept ans de vie commune et trois enfants nés de cette union.
Légalement, c’est le statu quo : le mariage offre une protection juridique, mais pas l’union de fait. Droit périmé? « Pour bénéficier d’un cadre juridique, il faut soit se marier ou faire un contrat d’union de fait. À lire! Lola contre Éric: la liberté de choix de qui? La perspective d’imposer des droits, des devoirs et des obligations réciproques aux conjoints vivant en union libre a suscité, autour de la cause de Lola contre Éric, des réactions parfois très émotives d’autant plus troublantes qu’elles touchent directement la question de l’égalité entre hommes et femmes, si chère aux Québécois. Cette question heurte aussi notre désir de préserver la liberté de choix de ceux qui ne désirent pas se marier. La réponse du plus haut tribunal du pays est contrainte par la forme que prennent les revendications qui lui sont présentées - en l’espèce, une cause de droit constitutionnel, où la question de l’encadrement approprié des conjoints de fait est posée en matière de discrimination et de droit à l’égalité.
Mais si cette décision invite au statu quo, elle est loin de résoudre la question pour des milliers de couples québécois. Le législateur québécois : un être polyglotte ? Pour des solutions novatrices et adaptées.