Usually I try to write about what’s going on in my real (read: non-blog) life at least once a week. Since we’re all settled into our fall routine and last week was full of work things, I don’t have anything to write this week. (I also went to an amazing Women’s Day event at my church. The theme was “The Missing Peace”. I prefer speaking with people one on one about my faith rather than blogging about it though. I took good notes, so if you want them, you can drop me an email…)

In the absence of having any real life stuff to talk about (since I don’t really do the day to day minutiae thing), I decided to give my opinion on a topic that caught my interest yesterday. Momlogic.com tweeted an old post called Should a Toddler Cover Up Her Ta-Tas?. Basically the reader was asking if she should let her 3 year old daughter take her shirt off in public. I’m going to go with the unpopular side and say “no”.

My husband and I have dealt with the issue of kids dressing (both our kids and other people’s kids) in our home. First of all, I don’t care whether or not it’s a boy or girl. (It’s not an issue of “ta-tas” to me.) At home, when it’s just our core family, I don’t care what our kids wear or don’t wear. However, when company is over, they have to wear tops and bottoms. It’s an issue of protection. I’m not under the delusion that I can protect my kids completely. However, it’s my job to do what I can. I don’t know everyone’s backgrounds that my kids are around. If issues with lusting after kids is in their past, I don’t want to cause them to struggle unnecessarily. And most of all, I don’t want them to act on those temptations – especially not with my kids!

We have had issues in the past where kids who felt comfortable around us, would undress in our home. If it was a group setting though, we would make them put back on their clothes. Once again…I would feel HORRIBLE if anything happened to a child under my care if there was anything (no matter how small of a thing) that I could have done to prevent it.

That’s also why you’ll never see pictures of my kids not wearing tops and bottoms on this blog. For instance when we went to Coco Keys, my son had his top off while he was swimming, but I would not share those photos in a public forum. We have plenty of those types of photos at home (what’s cuter than a baby in a diaper?!). It’s simply a matter of protection.

I’ll even go so far as to say that I don’t even like those little videos of the babies in diapers (and nothing else) dancing to Beyonce’s “Single Ladies”. Admittedly, they are very cute. However, in the back of my mind, I wonder how many of those million+ hits are from perverts. Cute home video: yes. National video: no. Of course that’s just my opinion. (Granted, I’m probably overcautious because I have worked with children for over 15 years in various capacities; have done many background checks and have been really surprised with various findings.) I don’t know. Ultimately, my mind-set is more “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

What do you think? Do you let your kids undress in public or group settings? (I’m not talking about situations like swimming and such where everyone is at various states of undress…)

Now that we’re getting into this full day school groove, I must say that the most intriguing part of the day is the after school pick-up. Three things have stood out to me:

1. Grandparents rock. The majority of the parents at Michael’s school work outside of the home during the day. When, I go to pick him up, the majority of the people who are picking up the other kids are the grandparents. It’s so sweet to see the bond between the little kids and their grandparents. They yell their names and run to them. Some of them are granddads and it’s so sweet to see how their grandkids have them wrapped around their little fingers. It’s just so precious. I love it!

2. Teachers need to use discretion when praising and/or criticizing kids. Several kindergarten classes are let out where Michael gets out of school. One day, there was this teacher (not Michael’s) who released the first kid to his guardian. “He’s such a good boy,” she gushed. Of course, the guardian was smiling from ear to ear. (Who doesn’t want to hear how great the kid that they love is?) That wasn’t the problem. The problem was that she didn’t say anything else about the individual kids whom she released after him. I was looking at the other guardians’ faces and they were each waiting with expectation to see what she would say about their kids. Eventually, one of the parents said, “And how was he?” about her kid. “He was alright. He’s getting better.” the teacher replied. I could literally see the parent’s face drop. I felt so bad for her. The point: if the time is too short to comment on each kid, then don’t comment on any! Even better, save the commentary for one on one time. Pick-up time is hectic as it is…no need to add to it. (That’s just my opinion.)

And

3. I must never be late for pick-up. For safety reasons, the parents are not allowed to come inside the school. So, the kids are lined up by class and released to their parents/guardians. It is SO depressing when there isn’t someone to pick up a kid. The teachers will say, “Do you see anyone here for you?” and the poor little kid will peer through the crowd and sadly say, “No, there’s no one.” Then, they have to wait inside to the side of everyone else until someone comes to claim them. Awww. There’s one little boy in particular whose dad is consistently late. One day, the little boy sadly said, “Awww man. My dad’s not here. Here’s NEVER here on time to get me!” I know that I can be a “Mama Bear”, but I just wanted to claim him, so he wouldn’t look so miserable! (That’s where the paranoia kicks in. I have nightmares of me being stuck on a subway somewhere in Manhattan AND my kid being the one waiting in the corner forever because no one is there to pick him up! I know…I have “issues”. I was talking about this with other moms and I’m just happy to know that I’m not the only one with this fear!)

Earlier this week, I read a post in the mommy track’d Newsdesk section, The New York Times Says The Opt Out Revolution Is Over. I like The New York Times, because it has some well written articles, so I clicked over to the post Recession Drives Women Back to the Work Force. The article made me think. The comments made me mad. Since the NYT is no longer accepting comments on this particular article, I’m going to share my thoughts here. (That’s one of the great things about having your own space on the web!)

Back in April 2007, I wrote a post Long Musing on “Balance” after returning from a Columbia College Women’s Networking breakfast where The New York Times’ “Life’s Work” columnist Lisa Belkin was speaking. The reason that I mention this is that the NYT article is a continuation of the “opting out” discussion.

There are points in the current article on which I agree. Yes, many highly educated women who chose to leave work outside of the home/stay at home with their children are reentering the work force out of financial necessity. Yes, it is humbling to go back to lesser careers after having taken time off to care for your kids. People have lost money in investments. Husbands/ significant others have been downsized or had pay cuts. Historically, women are known for doing whatever it takes to keep their families afloat.

Where I disagree is the part where women who have made the decision to take time off from traditional work to care for their kids are referred to as “the privileged minority that could afford not to work” and as “affluent working mothers”. As a mom choosing to care for your kids yourself, you are either classified as one of the “affluent ones” or “poor ones unable to afford child care”. (That explains why people tend to think that either I’m financially rich or “the nanny” when in reality I’m not either.)

That’s what makes me upset about the whole opting out conversation … things are not that black and white. I (and many moms of all races that I know) have chosen to step off the traditional career path in order to devote various spans of time to being the primary caregivers for our children. Most of us are not “affluent” in the financial sense. We’re not poor either. We simply shifted our priorities because we believed that was best for our individual families.

Let me (briefly) tell you my “opting out” story…

Yes, I was/am one of those Ivy League educated women who “opted out”. (I went to Columbia.) The life choices that I have made since becoming a mom have come as a shock not only to those who knew me, but also to me. I worked in corporate America for almost a decade before I had my first child. The “plan” was to take a year off of work and then go back when my son was one. Well, the plan changed. Around the time that I was supposed to go back to work, my husband and I started looking for childcare. It seemed like every time we opened a newspaper or looked at a television show, there was something about a babysitter/nanny/day care center/ whatever doing something harmful to a child in their care. Since we didn’t have family that could help take care of our son, my husband and I decided together that I would quit my job and care for our kid(s) until they were school-aged. I have never regretted my decision. I can’t put a price on peace of mind.

Were we affluent when we made the decision? No. We were financially stable. We were disciplined with our spending, had some savings and lived on a budget. We have made financial sacrifices in order for me to be able to stay at home with the kids. Maybe we won’t buy a brand new car or a brand new house for a few years. So what? My thinking was/is – people sacrifice financially all of the time for things that they really want (i.e. to pay for college). If parenting my child is one of the most important roles that I will ever play in this life, then why SHOULDN’T I take a financial hit for doing so?

Also, I think that my life priorities were formed for me while I worked in corporate America in my 20s. I worked in investment banking during the last recession wave. I distinctly remember people who had devoted their lives to building up the company – spending 80 – 100+ hours a week on the job/literally sleeping under their desks. When cuts came, some of those very same people (some who had just gotten married; just had a baby; etc.) were let go and forced to leave the exact same day. They couldn’t even pack up their cubicles or offices. They just had to leave the building and have their personal stuff sent to them. I remember my 20 something self making the decision that I would NEVER build my life around a company. In business, it’s business, not personal. Never get it twisted. So, yes there are penalties for taking time off to care for your family BUT who is to say that the very same women who have done so wouldn’t have ended up being corporate casualties anyway?

That’s the thing about life. Most choices have both positive and negative consequences. I don’t judge women with young kids who work outside of the home (by choice or necessity). I assume that they are doing what is best for their families. I assume the same about women who choose to stay home with their kids.

One last annoyance about this whole “opting out” discussion…
Why is it that society is fine with educated women being teachers, high priced nannies or working with other people’s kids in various capacities JUST SO LONG AS the kids that they are working with are not their own? Please…

And for the NYT commenter “C.” …don’t get me started about your assertion that being a stay-at-home mom is not a feminist choice. This choice is NOT only made by “those of means” and HELLO, some of the women who choose to stay home had their own savings before having children. Also, you’re not only a feminist if you’re lobbying for the rights of all women. If that were the case, then MANY women (not just stay at home moms) would not meet your definition of feminism. One last thing…your point about not giving women the same amount of money to go to school since they opt out…I’m sorry, are you paying my student loans from Columbia? I think not. Who are you (or anyone else for that matter) to determine “the greater good” when it comes to the choices that moms make? Feminism is rooted in choice. My mother, grandmother, etc. didn’t have a choice regarding whether or not they could devote themselves to raising their children rather than someone else’s. I do. I own my choice and you (nor anyone else) can make me feel “less” for making the best decision for my family.

Okay…now that’s out of my system. Moving on…

I really like InStyle magazine. I usually buy it off the newsstand at the start of each season just to get an idea of what’s out there fashion and beauty-wise. I especially like their September/fall fashion issues. I bought one at the airport when I was going to General Mills in MN last month. This one was especially full because it was also a celebration of the magazine’s 15th anniversary. Below are 10 things that I liked the most and 5 that I didn’t like at all.

Ten Things That I Loved…

1. Ankle boots: DKNY and TOD’s have some cute closed toe ones. Over the knee boots are also very popular at the moment, but I can’t pull off that look. (I’m 5’2.)

2. Ann Taylor: Although I’m more of an Ann Taylor Loft woman now that I’m no longer in corporate America, I love designer Lisa Axelson’s new collection in their stores. Their Fall 2009 collection is beautiful.

3. Bold Hosiery: Legs are a big focus for the fall. I’m past the age of wearing micro minis, but I can still have fun with hosiery! I especially like subtle patterns and the fall shades (teal, wine, etc.). Bare Necessities has a nice selection.

4. Bright coats: The classic camel coat is nice (p.281), but I especially like the teal, purple and fuchsia colored ones for a change of pace.

5. Curve hugging dresses: I like the dresses on page 172. They are fitted without “showing all of your business”. (Of course when InStyle speaks of women with curves though, they’re all size 4 or smaller!)

6. Deep colored nail polishes: Navy, teal, crimson – I love all of them. Of course I will primarily wear the colors on my toes.

7. Dell’s Netbook: I keep seeing all of these netbooks from various manufacturers. The cherry red Dell Inspiron Mini 10 ($299) that is included in this issue is especially cute.

8. PSP 3000 (Lilac): We’re a Nintendo DSI family with no immediate plans on changing handheld gaming systems. However, if I were a PSP player, I would want the lilac PSP – primarily for the color.

9. Ralph Lauren Dresses: There were two dresses that I cut out. Both happened to be from the Lauren by Ralph Lauren Dress Collection. They are reasonably priced ($124 and $144) and shapely.

10. Sleek ponytails: I’m a ponytail fan. I like that they are easy to do and are being worn sleek against the head. (They gave a tip to use hairspray on a toothbrush to smooth down the hairline.)

And Five Things That Were Not My Cup of Tea…

1. Big Hair Bows: Big bows only look cute on little girls.

2. Futuristic looking dresses: Save those for the Jetsons.

3. Harem Pants: Only Jeannie from “I Dream of Jeannie” looks cute in these types of pants.

4. Over the moon manicures: I just don’t like black nail polish – even (or especially) coupled with white polish.


5. Peep toe booties: I know that you’re supposed to wear them with thick tights, but the combination of open toes and boots just don’t make sense to me. It’s like when people couple big sweaters (cold) and shorts (hot). I just don’t “get” it, but to each her own…

(On a side note, InStyle is giving away 15 $1,000 shopping sprees here during the month of September. They are also offering special discounts from a variety of sponsors here.)

Recently, I was sent a Marcal Small Steps “family starter kit” to review. At first I thought, “Oh, another company jumping on the “green” bandwagon.” I was wrong. It turns out that Marcal has been using recycled paper to produce their tissue and towel products since 1950. Why didn’t I know that? I initially accepted the products to review simply because my husband already buys this line at our local grocery store. He doesn’t buy it because it’s earth-friendly. He buys it because it’s less expensive than its competitors! Also, it works just as well as other leading brands. Marcal is a great example of a company that helps people to “go green” at value prices.

Using the Marcal products made me think of a question that I have been asking myself lately when it comes to companies that produce green/earth-friendly products. How green is green enough? I have mixed thoughts.

Initially, I only liked method products, because the entire company is based on making environmentally-friendly cleaning products. Then, people began to tell me that there were similar companies (such as Seventh Generation) that were available at lower price points. I tried them out too. Their packaging isn’t as attractive as method’s, but the products work really well and the company also has deep convictions about being green. The Seventh Generation brand also has a wider variety of green products. Since then, I have come across several other lines that are not only effective but also earth-friendly.

Now, I have more to add to the equation. Larger companies are making natural cleaning lines (like The Clorox Company’s Green Works™ Cleaners). So far, I have declined offers to review such products because I have been conflicted regarding whether or not I want to support large companies jumping on the “green” bandwagon since it is a popular focus at the moment. Meanwhile – as one of my truly green friends said, “It’s the same company that makes bleach!” My dilemma: Is it better for a company to be a “little green” rather than not green at all? Do I only feel comfortable promoting green products from companies that are wholly committed to earth-friendly products?

So far, I only have questions – no real answers yet. For the record, I don’t profess that we are a green family. I consider myself “light green” – as in I prefer to do what’s best earth-wise as long as it doesn’t take an exorbitant amount of extra time, energy or money. Then again, I don’t say that this is a “green blog”… My conclusion: It’s not easy being green. Do I wish that all companies would go as green as (reasonably) possible across their entire product lines? Yes. Meanwhile, I guess that I’ll just have to go with my conscience on a case by case scenario.

What are your thoughts regarding companies with green product lines? Is it “all or nothing” or do you pick and choose based on price and other factors?

I’ve been offline for the last few days since we have been moving into our Queens apartment. Given the somewhat (yeah, right) obsessive personality that I have, I wasn’t okay until everything was unpacked and in its own place. I still have to figure out the curtains, wall coverings and other little miscellaneous things – but that will be “Stage 2”. (Have I mentioned that I don’t want to move again for AT LEAST another three years?)

Anyway, I wanted to share how we chose our moving company. First of all, it’s amazing to me that we actually paid someone to move us. In the past, we’ve just had moving parties and had a bunch of friends help us move followed by thank you dinner parties at our new place. I guess that we’re growing up though. Actually, the main reason that we paid professionals is that we have all of this amazing equipment “on loan”, because we’re one of Panasonic’s Living in HD families. I think that my husband would have had a heart attack (not literally) if something would have happened to his beloved flat screen television. No need to ruin friendships over “stuff”, so that’s why we decided to get a moving company.

We asked for referrals from personal friends first. We were so shocked when one of our more frugal friends mentioned that he had paid a thousand dollars to have a moving company move him. Then, I sent out a tweet on Twitter asking for recommendations. The names of two moving companies kept coming up. Since my husband was handling finding the moving company, I gave him the list of all the recommendations so that he could go to work. Since one of the popular names was the company that our “frugal friend” had used, we were leaning towards using them.

Now here’s the lesson for companies: Customer Service Trumps Social Media AND Personal References! We contacted the company and they had someone come over and do a walk-through of our home in order to set the rate for the move. We liked the concept of a set rate / no surprises and we really wanted to go with them. However, they lost our business because we had to chase after them to get their final quote. A man from their company did a walk-through of our apartment on Saturday and said that he would let us know the rate on Monday. On Monday, after we emailed him and called him, he said that he had crunched the numbers but he had to wait in order to get a supervisor to approve the quote. He would call us back by the end of the day / Tuesday morning at the latest. By Tuesday evening, my husband called again after not receiving a response to his earlier email. The quote was $910. I could be wrong, but in my opinion, if someone’s looking to pay you almost $1,000 for a service, they should not be the one who has to keep emailing and calling you in order to give you their money – especially in this economy and in stressful, time-sensitive occasions (like moving!).

While company “A” was dragging their feet, Oz Movers earned our business. My husband had emailed them as a comparison and they promptly emailed him back. Once we told them what needed to be moved, they sent over an estimate. (Their current rate is $135/hour for four movers.) From start to finish, they were a pleasure to work with. They followed up with us by phone and email to make sure that everything was all set for the move. They arrived 15 minutes early on the day of the move and worked steadily the whole time. They were so friendly and helpful that we were happy to pay the fee. (When they learned that we were using another service, Company “A” had warned us that we would end up paying much more with hourly rate movers. They were right. We ended up paying more – $5 more. We were more than happy to pay an extra $5 in order to use a company that was proactive and obviously valued our business!)

My husband and I cracked up laughing when we watched “Head of State”, starring comedian Chris Rock back in 2003. In the movie, a Black man becomes president of the United States (way before the reality of Barack Obama). Every time his competitor (the current VP) makes a speech, he ends it proclaiming “God Bless America — and No Place Else!” The reason that line was so satirical was that the sentiment was very common in American politics at the time. American government was very self-centered and self-focused.

Don’t get me wrong. I love America and the freedoms that we possess as Americans. I think that it’s the best country in the world to live (that’s why I live here!). However, I leaned more towards the view of Chris Rock’s character – “God Bless America and EVERYPLACE Else”. I still do.

As we celebrate the Fourth of July / Independence Day, I think past the fireworks, parades, picnics and barbecues (although my family really loves ourselves some good bbq!). More than anything, I’m grateful and proud that we’re emerging into a country that values all people – both in America and abroad. We’re all people. May God bless the whole world!

There was a time when I thought that age 50 was “old”. Now, I think of it as “young” (probably because I’m getting older!). In any event, I was saddened to hear about Michael Jackson’s passing. Irregardless of what you feel about his personal life (tragic, in my opinion), everyone can agree that he was one of the most talented entertainers of our time. For him (and all of the other people who pass away “too young” without media brouhaha)…

Last week, I kept thinking “you’ve got to be kidding me” when I read the New York Times article Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers. My main point of contention is that credit card companies are considering penalizing “responsible” card users for paying off our monthly balances. How crazy and backwards is that proposition?

To make up for lost income from (potential) limited penalties on other riskier borrowers, the credit card companies are considering a variety of ways to make up for lost income. I realize that we all need to make some sacrifices for the overall good and I’m not (super) opposed to some of the ideas. I can deal with annual fees. I can even deal with limiting credit card rewards programs. What I can not stomach is the idea of companies charging clients with great credit interest immediately on their purchases (instead of on a monthly basis).

To all of the major banks who decide to go this route, I say, “Good-bye.” Although, it’s more annoying, I’ll either switch card carriers or just pay by cash or check. It seems pretty obvious (to me anyway) that most people who pay their balances in full each month, use their cards for convenience. When you start tackling immediate interest on to our payments, the cards (in my opinion) are no longer convenient!

I know that I’m not the only one who feels this way. As some of my twitter friends replied, this is “nuts, crazy, maddening, not fair, completely and utterly ridiculous.” One person succinctly (yet accurately) stated “It seems to me like that would be encouraging the behavior that got us in the current situation!” Enough said. I’m getting off my soapbox now.

(To follow updates about this topic, visit this NY Times page.)

What do you think? Is it fair that credit card companies are considering penalizing those of us who pay our balances in full each month?

Let me write upfront that I am not a trendy fashionista. I have more of a classic style. However, I like to stay on top of what’s going on in the fashion world, so that I don’t look dowdy and outdated. Each season, I usually pick a few trends that stretch (but don’t completely change) my personal style a bit and incorporate them into my wardrobe. Here are my top three spring fashion picks:

1. An updated white shirt: I try to get a new one each season anyway. Recently, I purchased a Ruffled collar shirt from the Gap. I get compliments on it each time that I wear it. (Ruffles are another spring trend.)


2. Black trousers: (Black-and-white are a “trend” this spring. It helps that the color scheme is a part of my wardrobe staples!) A month ago, I bought a pair of black pants from one of my favorite stores, but they keep getting “linty”. Where can I get a pair of decent, relatively inexpensive (>$100) black trousers that won’t pill or attract lint like crazy?

3. Pastels: Pink is my favorite color, so I can’t wait to get a pink dress. I haven’t seen one that I especially love, but I’m still looking. (My bridesmaids’ dresses at my wedding were pink.)

There are so many other trends out there that depend on your various styles. There’s one spring trend that I see practically everywhere that I just don’t like though…jumpsuits. My opinion is that jumpsuits only look good on babies. I know that I’m in the minority regarding this thought, but that’s okay…it’s just my opinion.

In any event, I’ve compiled a few links from six top fashion magazines regarding “2009 Spring Fashion Trends” so that you can pick out what works best for you. Happy browsing!

-Elle’s Fashion Trend Report

-Glamour’s “Dos and Dont’s of Spring Fashion Trends

-Harper’s Bazaar (I like their “Fabulous at Every Age” approach.)

-InStyle (I especially like that they have a section with tips for various body types.)

-O, The Oprah Magazine (Although technically not a “fashion magazine”, I like their section on inexpensive spring fashions. Their selections also apply the trends most realistically for the “average” mom/woman in my opinion.)

-Vogue’s Trend Report

Are you especially excited about any of the new spring trends?