My blog has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 5 seconds. If not, visit
http://thegirlrevolution.com
and update your bookmarks.

Monday, July 30, 2007

Long Distance Mothering


I recently met a woman who faced a fascinating dilemma. Would you consider mothering long-distance for a year?

by Tracee Sioux

Debbie Mahoney was a registered nurse who had gone as high as she could, having achieved a doctorate degree and completing post-doctoral work in nursing. She knew she was capable of more and wanted to pursue a career as a nurse practitioner.

In 1996 she applied for and won a fellowship from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, an organization "helping people to help themselves,” to pursue her NP license. The new status would double her salary, as well as open new professional doors for her.

“I knew I wanted to be a nurse practitioner,” Debbie said. “[The Kellogg Foundation] paid my salary and my schooling was free. I was totally relieved of work while going to school and it was something I had always wanted to do.”

The catch? She had to move from East Texas to North Carolina for one year. Which would have been no big deal for a single professional, but she had three children and a husband.

“Yes, it did occur to me to stay,” Debbie admits. “Part of it too was the honor to be awarded this type of fellowship. It was a big deal at work. We were caught up with the great honor.”

She went on. “Really, my children were supportive of me going and I asked each of them and they said, 'Go for it Mom. We’re proud of you.' It was a once in a lifetime deal. If I passed it up, it wasn’t going to come again.”

Her husband Tom, a nurse anesthetist, had a job he couldn't very well abandon for one year.

“My husband was very supportive because he knew this would advance my career,” Sarah said. “To be honest, I’m sure the fact that my salary was going to double and we had three kids to put through college was what made him think it would be such a good thing. We had been married for 22 years by that time, so I guess you could say our marriage had a baseline.”

Sarah and her family had 10 months to get ready for her year away from home. They went to family counseling and talked about how her leaving the family was going to affect each member.

“Our counselor was very supportive,” remembers Debbie. “He said, “If you don’t do it, you may always have regrets. He felt like our kids would benefit from my going in the long run.”

Not everyone was so supportive. Debbie remembers being confronted by a woman in her church, “How could you do this? How could you be such a terrible mother to go off and leave your family?”” she said. “That made me sad, I know there are traditional values. But, in my own spiritual life, I really felt like this was something God wanted me to do and that the Lord had gone before me and arranged everything.”

Joseph, now a 26-year-old married father of two with a masters degree in medical physics, was 16 when his mother left.

“I had no interest in going with her,” Joseph said. “At the time I resented it a little bit. I felt like I had two years left at home and she was going to be gone for one of them. But, I had no interest in going with her. I was well established at school and I was on the football team,” Joseph remembered.

“I don’t want to give the impression I was traumatized by it; by no means do I feel sorry for myself. But, I guess at the time I thought, well she’s doing what she wants to do and it doesn’t involve me or my dad or my sister. I was never angry about it, but it for a short time it was hard.

“I guess the question is, do you live to work or work to live?” Joseph said. “We were getting by pretty well. I looked at it like, she’s already got a decent job and our family wasn’t lacking. So it wasn’t something for her family. It was for her. I realize now our country and the world is not fair to live in and a lot of women have to make that choice. I don’t really think it would have been any different if it was my father that went to North Carolina. The role of a successful female never crossed my mind. It felt like putting work before family. I didn’t look at it as symbolic empowerment for women.

“But, there is no long-term damage to our relationship,” Joseph said.

Debbie made it clear that had it been Joseph’s Senior year in high school she would not have taken the fellowship. She also pointed out that Joseph had privileges, such as private college tuition, they wouldn’t have been able to provide without the extra salary.

Sarah, 13 at the time, had just made the cheerleading team at her junior high school and decided to stay home with her dad too.

“I was worried about my daughter a lot,” Debbie said. “The counselor had told me to hide little notes for her that she’d find along the way. I don’t think that really meant anything to her. I don’t think it was meaningful at all. She had a lot of strife going on with cheerleading that year, but even had I been at home, she wouldn’t have shared that with me. My daughter is not a person who opens up, she keeps things inside of her. So, I was most worried about her.”

Now 23-years-old, a daycare worker in Columbia, Missouri, Sarah said, “I was happy for my mom, but I was sad to see her go. I was really proud of her. It wasn’t really that hard, I was involved with school activities and we just went about our day to day routine, it was pretty cool. We got to see her every six weeks or two months so I didn’t feel like I was missing her too much.

“It really showed me that women can excel in the work force if you have those kinds of opportunities,” Sarah continued. “We grew up in a small town where typically the dad goes to work and makes the money and all the decisions. But, it was great to see my mom make her own decisions and pursue her own career.”

Steven, a 3rd Grader, moved with his mom. Mother and son agree the year was fantastic for him.

“I felt like he was always overshadowed by the other siblings so this was a great opportunity for him,” Debbie said. “I really think my three children are closer because of it. I think they missed their little brother and before most of the conversation at dinner was all about the two of them. My older son was a little bit of a bully to his little brother and when we went away and came back I think there was a whole new appreciation between the siblings.

“I think it was a good experience to live somewhere else,” Stephen, now a college freshman said. My school in North Carolina was all black, so that was a good experience too, to see some diversity other than what I had been exposed to at home.

“I was always closer to my mom, so I didn’t really miss my dad too much. But I probably would have been upset had my mom left me,” Stephen said.

Each of Debbie’s children said they would consider making a similar decision in their own future families if the opportunity presented itself.

Joseph said about his wife Deidre, also a nurse, “If she really wanted to do it, I wouldn’t want to hold her back. But, my wife has a very different personality than my mother.”

As a woman herself now, Sarah said, “Oh yes, I would do it. It was awesome. I would love to do something like that.”

For herself, Debbie feels professionally fulfilled and she doesn’t regret leaving her family that year.

“I teach in the graduate program at the University of Texas at Tyler and practice as nurse practitioner. I am able to go on mission trips with Refuge International where I can see patients and prescribe medication and perform small surgeries. I also sit on their board of directors,” Debbie said.

“Being a nurse practitioner has helped me offer more to the world, and my children, than I could have if I hadn’t done it,” said Debbie.

“I think it was definitely empowering to see my mom go for that year and we need more women like my mom out there,” said her daughter.

Photograph: Mahoney family picture taken at Joseph's graduation from Georgia Tech two months ago. He received a master's degree in medical physics. From L-R, husband Tom, Debbie, youngest son, Stephen, oldest son, Joseph, Joseph's daughter, Catherine, his wife Deirdre who is holding their son, Patrick, on the right is daughter, Sarah.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Money & Happiness

by Tracee Sioux

One of the points Suze Orman brings up in her book Women & Money is that money matters. Money, she says, makes a fundamental difference in our happiness and our lives and to pretend that it doesn't is a great big lie. In fact, she says it might might be the source of dysfunction in our relationship with money.

We've all heard a million cliches, both Christian and otherwise, about money being unimportant.

Money can't make you happy.
Money isn't the most important thing.
You can't buy happiness.
It's the free things in life that count.
No one ever said on their death bed, wish I had spent more time at work.
The root of all evil is the love of money.
The widow gave her last mite, that's how much she loved God.
You can't take it with you.
Don't be such a Scrooge.
Don't be so money-hungry or greedy.
You can't out-give God.
She'll give you the shirt off her back.
She was so selfless.

Orman takes a bold approach to this kind of logic - it's flat-out wrong and if we could get rid of these guilty feelings about money then we might be able to develop a healthy relationship with money and stop being so irresponsible about it.

Everyone who lives needs money, she says. To pretend otherwise, is dishonest. The relationship we have with our money is an extension of the relationship we have with ourselves. If we are irresponsible about taking care of our money, we are irresponsible about taking care of ourselves. If we don't take care of ourselves then someone, our adult children, will eventually have to take care of us.

When are constantly taking care of others' needs financially, at the cost of our own financial needs it's a poor financial decision, she says. There is no wiggle room about this for Orman.

She very matter-of-factly states, nothing more directly affects your happiness than money.

She has a great list of ways the money is unimportant theory is a lie: health, love, and respect - can't have any of them without money, she says.

Health - if you get sick you must have money. If your family gets sick you must have money. Can you be happy without health? Not as happy as you would be if you had health or could afford to obtain health. Insurance costs money, doctors costs money, prescriptions cost money - you must have money to maintain a healthy life.

Love - Imagine staying in a relationship solely for love, because you have the money to stay or go. Imagine knowing that if you die those you love will be taken care of because you were responsible with money and didn't leave them with financial burdens.

Respect - You can't respect yourself if your financial life is out of control. You can't teach your children to respect you if you don't respect yourself enough to take care of yourself financially. You certainly can't teach your children to live within their means and live responsible disciplined lives if you don't do those things.

Reading this chapter in Women & Money was intense for me. I have a lot of money guilt, I think. I'm always deeply affected by all of those Christian cliches about money. At the same time I've discovered that what Orman is saying is true, money may not be able to buy health or happiness, but it sure would be a lot easier to pursue if an illness didn't bankrupt you.

It would be nice not to burden my children with my poor financial decisions. It would be great to send my children out into the world both able to make a living and able to wisely manage money. It would be great if I had older relatives who had paid more attention to their own money matters so I didn't have to spend so much of my energy worrying about them so much.

I would be delighted if when my daughter graduates from college she felt it within her grasp and within her rights to pursue money without guilt. After all, she's an American and we're all about the profit, right? Well, apparently some of us women, still need to work on that.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Vajayjay Talk

I have this friend who had a chronic terrible itchy horrible nightmarish recurring yeast infection for 3 years. Well, actually she thought it was a yeast infection, but she kept going to the doctor and the yeast infection culture kept coming back negative. He ran a bunch of tests and she tested negative for all the other vaginal infections as well. She was constantly spending money to try the Diflucan and the over the counter yeast infection medicine and none of it was really helping.

She noticed that it always flared up after sex. She started to think maybe it was psychosomatic, you know maybe her vagina was just getting pissed off about the nature of its sex life or something. Like that Sex in the City episode where Charlotte’s vagina gets depressed? Like that. Her vagina felt angry and pissed off more than depressed. It would wake her in the night screaming and agitated. This problem with her vagina was really getting to her, leaking into her personality and making her more frustrated and agitated than normal. Hell, can you imagine how frustrated and upset you’d be if YOU had an incurable yeast infection for 3 years?

Finally, after a couple of years of Ob/GYN appointments the doctor tells her that he’s giving her a prescription steroid – finally relief. The prescription was called clotrimazole.

A few months later her baby got a terrible diaper rash. The nurse said to go get Lotramine AF for his rash. The nurse also happens to mention, if it’s cheaper, she should buy the jock itch cream because it’s the exact same ingredients.

So she’s comparing prices and reads the ingredients and sees the familiar word clotrimazole on the jock itch cream. The same stuff her doctor prescribed for her itchy irritated vagina.

She goes home and asks her husband, Honey, do you have jock itch?

Yeah, why do you ask? he says.

We’re not having sex again until you go get a prescription for jock itch, she tells him.

There are three lessons to this story:

*Sometimes what feels like a chronic yeast infection could be jock itch being passed back and forth between you and your partner. Try the Lotrimin isle.
*A terrible diaper rash may also be jock itch, try the Lotrimin isle.
*For some reason, even the OB/GYN, a man specializing in the vagina and used to talking about a vagina's issues, was too embarrassed to tell the woman her diagnosis.

More candid talk about the vagina can only be more empowering for women and girls.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Empower Your Daughter With Health Insurance

by Tracee Sioux

I recieved an email is from MoveOn.org, a political action group monitoring healthcare. Right now Congress is deciding whether to a) take away healthcare from millions of children or b)allow millions more children access to healthcare.

No girl can be empowered if she can't even go to the doctor for her vacinations or minor injuries. No parent can be empowered if they feel they can't afford to take their kids to the doctor. Congress has until September to make a decision and they need to hear from you. As a citizen you have the right, and the responsibility, to make it known what you expect of them.

Sending petitions does send a message to Congress. They may not know your personal name, but they will know that millions of Americans are tired of seeing children go without healthcare.

Click on this link to encourage congress to vote to expand, rather than eliminate, healthcare for children.

If you're like me and you think perhaps signing a petition won't matter enough, you can also send a letter directly to your elected officials at Congress.org.

My letter said:

I expect you to vote in favor of expanding children's health care. We're a nation of Christians and Christians are supposed to care for others and help take care of others. There is no pursuit of happiness if you, or your children are sick. We, as a nation, are not designed to make sure insurance companies and doctors make more money. We, as a nation, are designed to take care of the people. A nation of the people, governed by the people, for the people is a nation that should take care of its people. Health care for the middle class is getting way too expensive, even for the insured. I expect you to pass the SCHIP resolution to expand coverage to more children. If you do not, you will lose my vote and anyone I can pursuade to join me.

Sincerely, Tracee Sioux

Feel free to copy and paste it into your own letter at Congress.org.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Teaching Frustration

by Tracee Sioux

In my quest to lower my 5-year-old daughter Ainsley's BMI and add more exercise I said yes to her request to attend yoga class with me this morning.

I am also teaching her to swim myself.

When I teach my daughter things I usually feel impatient and frustrated if it doesn't go exactly the way I want it to. In swimming she really just wants to goof off and won't ever listen to my instructions or follow them. In yoga she was fidgety and loud and disrupting the other ladies who were trying to get into their quiet place.

The worst part is that she is exactly like me as a learner. Difficult to teach. I learn through experimentation and trial and error and taking shortcuts. It's only in my 30s that I'm realizing the little details are important steps that are there for a good reason.

When I'm attempting to teach my daughter yoga, money or swimming I get frustrated, which is accompanied by a strange guilt.

It's a wonder my mother could teach me anything, I catch myself thinking. I've even caught my own self throwing up my arms in frustration and surrender, forget it, I've had enough.

It's like a mirror-image going two directions - one to the past with empathy for what my mother went through trying to mother me and one to the present with frustration while trying to deal with my headstrong daughter who just wants to learn through exploration.

I am really dedicated to overcoming the frustration. I realize, having been the daughter, that there is nothing wrong in learning through exploration. After all, I seem to have learned quite a lot.

I think the key is taking a step back during our lessons and following her. I need to accept that a person generally doesn't change the way they process information and certainly they never change the way they learn through exasperated sighs. But, hopefully, I can change my frustration level.

Monday, July 23, 2007

Day of Rest

By Tracee Sioux

Produce, produce, produce.

My husband and I tend to be workaholics sometimes. I constantly feel like I'm under pressure to get everything done. Especially since having another baby and working from home. I just feel like there is not enough time to do everything I need to be doing. I'm loving the work, and love being fed from this source of energy, but I'm imposing all this pressure to market and make the work profitable right now.

I found myself starting to wonder how long I can keep up this pace. It's only July and Ainsley isn't in school until September. My kids are sick of entertaining themselves and bored. Yet, I feel so newly driven, It feels great to be driven by my writing again. It is fantastic to feel passionately and write passionately.

But, it's the balance that is in question. I started to wonder when I'll ever get a break. When I'll ever have a moment to relax and just be.

Yesterday, the sermon was on the Sabbath. I thought, Well duh, the being and the resting is built right in if you would just listen! It's always been there. You're the one who has decided to ignore it.

While I am now late in publishing my blogs and haven't been to work out this morning and feel totally behind in my week. I also feel like stopping the productivity for one day really provided some perspective about balance.

I don't want my kids to feel so driven that they can't rest. I want them to understand and value a work ethic, but not at the cost of everything else.

It's funny how when you're a kid things like naps feel punitive. My daughter throws a massive fit at the mention of a nap (Zack still loves them). Keeping the Sabbath Day Holy was a big deal in my house growing up. I guess that did feel punitive and restricting to me then.

Now though, it's like free day, gift from God day, no pressure day, lazy rest day. My favorite day.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Cleanliness - Women & Money


By Tracee Sioux

One of the things I wish I had inherited from my own mother was cleanliness and organization. My mother is very clean, neat, tidy, and organized.

At a recent visit to my mother's house I saw that she had kept the original little people that went with the Little People Bus. All of them in good condition.

I could never have pulled that off. After picking up the same $1 store toy about 5 times I simply rid myself of it by throwing it in the garbage.

Suze Orman, in Women & Money, says that we can never become wealthy if we are not clean and don't take care of our things.

Let me first state that my home is not filthy. It is simply too small and there is no where to put things away. We've simply outgrown the house. There are also two small children running around getting stuff out all day long.

It's a total fiction that your home is cleaner if you stay-at-home or work-from-home. It is, in reality, much messier. Think about it, if you picked up the house, then left the house all day long it would be clean when you got back. However, if you're trying to write and there are two children at home all day then the only thing that can result is a messier house. Yes,I know that picture at the top looks bad. But, as I said, I can't write, keep two children occupied AND keep the house clean. If you can do it - well, good for you. I, myself, have limitations.

My car looks like a freaking garbage dump half the time. Frankly, I didn't care enough about that hideous old Oldsmobile to clean it. Too, I'm always exhausted when we get home so lots of stuff gets left in the car. Not to mention all the crap my kids are constantly dragging home. Why can't the school throw away all the drawings and coloring book pages? Why does it have to end up in my car and my house - am I supposed to keep every single thing they ever draw, write, glue or color? I don't have the space for that.

But, putting away my Shame & Blame as Suze recommends I realize I've got to stop making excuses.

But, I admit my attitude about things is getting in the way of better things.

First, obviously this is a good problem to have - not enough room for my stuff means that we've got more than enough stuff. We've got a plethora of stuff that is ripping the house apart at the seams. That means we are prosperous and should be grateful about our prosperity rather than complaining about it.

Second, I think we've got left-over feeling of lack around here. We had to do without lots of stuff for a while. And that translated into accepting every hand-me-down and gift offered. It also translated into us buying stuff we didn't really love or enjoy because it was "better than nothing."

Third, we feel like we're being ungrateful by cleaning out and getting rid of stuff. For instance, there were some lovely people who made Zack some blankets. In fact, so many people made Zack blankets that he never used several of them. I finally got the courage up to take them to the shed to be sold at a garage sale. Obviously not the ones my mother or grandmother made, but the ones the secretary at my husband's old job. I just don't have room for it. Likewise, I need to banish my emotional attachment to cute baby clothes that don't fit the baby anymore.

Fourth, what if it comes back in style? I have clothes I love and have pulled them back out for the second time now. But, really could I live if I had to buy another belt or a another top in 20 years when it came back in style? Is it costing me wealth to keep it around? I certainly don't have room for new stuff if I'm keeping all that old stuff around. And while we're talking about clothes I keep my fat clothes around too - just in case fattness overtakes me again. Well, since he got that vasectomy I don't intend to get fat from pregnancy again. So, maybe I could just commit to not needing the fat clothes again? Besides, it will serve me right to have to go buy some if I end up in size 16 pants ever again.

This is, I think, hanging onto old baggage and old issues. To change the way we feel about money we have to change the way we feel about the things money can buy. Hanging onto things we don't need anymore is just telling ourselves that we don't have enough. If we get rid of it, we will miss it. That's true in some cases, believe me I've rid myself of everything I owned several times and I DO miss some stuff.

But, most of the stuff - never thought about it again. Since the 8 qualities of a wealthy woman chapter the Suze Orman book I've hauled out 4 giant garbage bags of stuff to the shed to be sold at a garage sale. Money for a down payment on a bigger house.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Give Me An "A"


by Tracee Sioux

I've been super-conflicted about letting my 5-year-old daughter participate in cheerleading.

Isn't it better to be the one cheered on, the one actually playing the sport, than to be cheering from the side-lines? I think so. I want to see my daughter actively participating in athletics, not standing on the side of the game wearing a short skirt, bopping around, cheering for the team. The boys' team.

Have you ever seen a gang of boys jumping up and down cheering on a girl's soccer or basketball team? Never mind that cheerleaders stand on the side of football games where girls still aren't allowed. Also, in Texas cheerleading is highly competitive and I would argue, not the good kind. As a femimommy, I just hate the idea of cheerleading.

But, as I said in Red BMI, I need to actively seek exercise opportunities for her. The only options available were hip-hop and cheerleading. Then my friend said, Hey, let her come to my church's vacation Bible school, the theme is sports. She can choose soccer, t-ball, basketball or cheerleading.


If I thought I could get away with it, I wouldn't have told her she had the option of cheerleading. She's too smart to fall for that kind of crap. Instead, I listed the options.

She gave me a sly smile, knowing I would disapprove, and said, I want to do the cheerleading.

Have you ever wondered why girls should be cheering for boys, but boys don't cheer for girls? Do you think that's okay?

Mama, when I went to watch Eric play basketball Emma was cheering for a girls' basketball team.

Are you sure?

Well, you weren't there, but they had girls playing basketball and I think Emma was cheering for that team.

Do you think it's fair that only boys are allowed to play football but girls stand on the side and cheer for them?

I don't even want to play football, she pointed out.

When Emma took cheerleading, she informed me, they didn't wear belly shirts, they wore long ones and I don't think they did anything imapropriate.

My husband didn't think it was a big deal. My friend thought I was being too extreme. Both pointed out that boys cheer these days too. The difference is, there are not entire scantily clad gangs of boys cheering for the girls' teams.

In the end, neither argument swayed me in favor of cheerleading. What did sway me is that my particular girl wants to try it. She thinks it will be fun.

I decided it would be more empowering for her to be able to make her own decision about which sport to try than it would be for me to forbid cheerleading on a feminist principle.

She's just a different kind of girl than I was. She's more of a girly kind and I was more of a tom-boy. But, I don't think it would be empowering to make her feel bad about being a girly-girl.

The more I thought about it, I could trace my negative feelings about cheerleading back to the time my parents told me we were moving again to a town with a small enough high school, where I could make it as a cheerleader.

Upset about the umpteenth move, there I stood dressed head-to-toe in black, pale skin, red lipstick totally Mod screaming, "Why would I want to be a cheerleader?" What I really wanted to articulate was, "Have we met? Do you know anything about me at all?"

So, to avoid a similar episode with my daughter, I'll acknowledge that she is the kind of girl who thinks being a cheerleader is fun. And I'm going to get okay with that.

I did some research and according to the Official Cheerleader's Handbook, cheerleading was invented at Princeton in the 1860s by men. They didn't let girls do it until the 1920s when they added gymnastics and tumbling at the University of Minnesota. It was World War II, and no boys being available, that transitioned the sport to where 90% of cheerleaders became female.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Complaint Free House


By Tracee Sioux

Did you see that complaint free world bracelet on Oprah in March? It's this bracelet that brings focus to complaining to encourage you to stop.

I immediately ordered several of these bracelets, mostly because I'm sick to death of my daughter's complaining.

If there is something you don't like about your children I think if you look closely enough you'll realize they got it straight from you. Which sucks. Because to fix the problem in your child, you first have to fix yourself. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

Ainsley's complaining has reached epic proportions. I would say her complaining takes up the majority of the day. She's either complaining or I am correcting the complaining, suggesting she be happy or punishing the complaining for 50-75% of our interactions in the last month or so.

I'm a masterful and creative complainer and I guess if I really examine it I complain more than the average person. But, I justify it for this reason or that. My complaining doesn't bother me, it amuses me. I usually amuse other people.

Have I robbed my daughter of a positive outlook and an optimistic perspective with my hobby of complaining? It wouldn't be worth it then to continue my complaints. Ainsley isn't a naturally negative soul. She tends to say things like, Zack's crying sounds like music.

The question is, am I ready to give up complaining to save my daughter's natural optimism? Giving up complaining feels almost like giving up smoking. I feel like I need the complaining and that perhaps I won't be able to find ways to cope without it.

Even bigger, could I not complain about Ainsley's complaining? Would I even be able to have a conversation with her if I wasn't allowed to correct (read: complain about) her complaining?

Thank goodness the bracelet isn't here yet. I'm not sure I'm ready to give up my complaining fix yet.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Unrealistic Expectations of Perfection



By Tracee Sioux

I think Hillary Clinton should be the next president because it will change the potential of every girl in America. Changing the potential of every girl is changing the potential of half the population in America. That is not insignificant. I also happen to agree with her politics, but if she were a Republican, say Condoleeza Rice, current National Security Advisor, I would vote for her. I want to vote for a woman in 2008 because I want to empower girls.

The argument against Hillary Clinton I've been hearing from Republican women is upsetting me.

I would love a woman but not Hillary Clinton, she's not a very good role model.

What really irritates me about this argument is that these exact same women are totally fine with George W. Bush as a good role model. Hello, the man did cocaine and is a recovering alcoholic. He got a DUI for heaven's sake. And he's a good role model?

I'm trying to figure out how exactly Hillary Clinton is a negative role model and I'm coming up empty. Yeah, there was White Water, but I'm not clear anymore whether Hillary did anything wrong there. Martha Stewart actually went to prison for her financial scandal, but everyone's willing to let her go on with her career baking and cleaning and decorating.

Her biggest flaw, as far as I can tell, is that she's married to Bill Clinton and stayed even though he cheated on her in a very public and humiliating way. But, she's not the one who did anything wrong in that situation. He was the sleezeball there, all she did was not divorce him.

She had one child. Is it that she worked as a lawyer and made professional strides while mothering Chelsea? Is that the unforgivable as far as conservative women go?

Hasn't every president been professionally ambitious? Haven't they all been fathers with careers that often kept them away from their kids? I imagine Hillary, while being professionally ambitious, was most-likely even more pro-active about parenting Chelsea than any of the ambitious men have been about fathering their children.

Chelsea is not a child and seems to have survived her parents' marriage. She seems to have survived having a professional mother.

Why are the choices Hillary made as a mother getting in the way of her Presidential potential?

Why are women willing to let the work vs. stay-at-home mothering argument get in the way of finally achieving some gender-wide empowerment by being represented at the highest level of government?

I challenged a smart, thinking, former professional woman with why she thought George W. Bush was a good-enough role model, even though he had been an alcoholic with a DUI conviction and had used cocaine. She said she believed in redemption and thought changing his ways was being a good example.

I just wonder why she can't apply the same standard of good-enough to Hillary Clinton. Why can't the forgiveness and redemption extend to a woman candidate? I think it all goes to back to the unrealistic expectations women have for ourselves and each other. If we free ourselves of that burden we might actually be represented in government and therefore be empowered as a whole.

Gender equality is good for every woman and every girl. Whether a woman counts herself as a Conservative Christian Republican Stay-At-Home Mom or she writes her definition as a Liberal Angry Lesbian Childless Activist, empowerment is a good thing. The further one of us gets politically the more options and choices all of us have.

In the end we're all women and I think we can afford to be on the same team to further our collective empowerment. Hillary Clinton may not be the only path to empowerment, but she represents an available and achievable one right now.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

New Money

By Tracee Sioux

I found Chapter 1 in Women & Money: Owning the Power to Control Your Destinyboth validating and empowering. For me it was great to have my feeling of bluffing as a professional validated in a historical sense. Orman brings home the point that women have not, historically, filled the role of workers or the role of people who have their own money. When speaking of a collective conscience as females 25 years is like 5 minutes and the result is that our “new money” is still something we don’t really know how to handle yet.

This could not be more true. It’s also incredibly relevant when trying to empower a daughter. Since I am learning this for the first time I think it will be most empowering to my daughter to work out the kinks out loud. (Rather than whispering about money as previous generations have.)

Our girls need to understand that the world is still full of “firsts” for women. First woman Speaker of the House, Thanks Nancy Pelosi, first woman running for President, Thanks Hillary Clinton, etc. I think it would be a mistake not to give our daughters the historical perspective that we don’t have very much experience at incorporating work into our family lives and it’s frankly, difficult and full of sacrifices and unforeseen pitfalls.

Unrealistic expectations of perfection can be enormous burdens for women. We need to be careful not to pass our judgment about each others’ work vs. stay-at-home choices to our daughters. The most empowering thing to pass on to girls today is the awareness that they will have choices. Ideally, we can send them off into the world empowered to make either choice, whichever they feel most comfortable with or with whatever combination they can make work.

Either way, we need to send them into the world expecting to be valued whether they make money or not. Orman beings out the point that women are undervaluing themselves if they stay-at-home and don’t make money AND they are undervaluing themselves if they go out and work.

In Chapter 1 she also says this is only to be expected considering how new access to money is for women. Why would they know what to do with it or how to handle it? It’s not as if these lessons were ingrained in our collective consciousness for millennia as they were for men. It’s a great point.

Yet, for our daughters surely we can teach them better and give them sound words about money. I know the classic psychology of say Dr. Phil would have us believe that children shouldn’t be burdened with adult things like the family finances.

I would argue that such “protection” doesn’t empower our girls to go out into the world and make good financial choices. I think we should be working out the kinks “out loud” with our kids, daughters especially. How can we help them avoid financial pitfalls if we continue our bluff or never admit to mistakes?

On my mother's side I'm the first generation career woman. On my father's I'm the third. Either way, that's not much experience. But, my daughter will have me telling her what to watch for, what to think about, what to avoid and what to do. Hopefully, she won't feel so much like she's faking it.

For more on Chapter 1 and how we can get on the same side as women, check out BlogFabulous. By the way, this is the first time I’ve ever led a virtual book club (or any book club for that matter) so I am still working out the kinks of how to have an online conversation between two websites (maybe I should’ve just picked one, but it’s an important issue). Please cut me some slack.

Friday, July 13, 2007

Global Democracy Promotion Act


by Tracee Sioux

The American Government participates in legislating morality with unconstitutional things like the Global Gag Rule, which doesn't make us very popular in certain parts of the world.

The Global Gag Rule denies all funding (for every kind of aid including food) to any and every medical professional or organization if they say the word abortion. The Global Gag Rule is blatantly selective moral legislation. Aren't we supposed to be the beacons of free speech and democracy and freedom around the world? It completely contradicts itself. The Global Gag Rule is blatantly unconstitutional because we supposedly believe in the principle of freedom of speech, yet we deny funding to anyone who practices it. I question whether other countries hate us because we believe in freedom or because we insist on enforcing two-faced International policy like this.

It is absolutely not America's place to go around telling the rest of the world what the boundaries of morality are. We shouldn't go around demanding that every country on the planet adopt "right to life" policies. It's not our place to legislate their cultures. They are not so stupid as to believe it is our right - which is why it pisses them off.

It's anti-woman and anti-girl selective morality to ignore mass rape via ethnic cleansing and the selling of millions of girls and women for prostitution around the world, but then drawing a moral line at abortion. Perhaps if the United States wants to legislate morality we might decide to step in on behalf of women before the abortion is in question? You know, before they are beaten, raped and sold and become pregnant and infected with HIV and other STDs. Since we're not going to claim the human rights of women as our responsibility, we should just stay out of the morality legislation business all together.

The Global Gag Rule requires women and girls to carry their rapists' babies to term.
Population Control, a watchdog group monitoring reproductive freedom, sent me an email saying there is currently legislation before congress to finally do away with the Global Gag Rule. Below are the details and a link.

"A new bill, the Global Democracy Promotion Act (S. 1744), has been introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). This bill sets a simple standard: Restrictions we dare not impose on Americans should not be imposed on those who happen to live outside our borders. It will end the punishment of health care providers that observe the same standards of medical ethics and seek the same freedom of speech that apply in the United States. And it will end the use of American aid as a tool to stifle free speech and undermine medical ethics." via PopulationControl.org.

Do the right thing - Practice your Constitutional right to free speech and Open your mouth to stop the anti-girl, anti-freedom of speech, two-faced and hypocritical International policy of the Global Gag Rule. Sending a letter takes two seconds - just click here.

Read about how certain US Senators wanted to be so anti-girl as to forbid contraception as part of the Global Gag Rule. Then read how letters like yours and voices like yours stopped it from happening. You can and should make a difference.

Global Gag Rule IS Anti-Girl

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

It's NEVER The Copay

By Tracee Sioux

Your ankle better be broken.

Do you know how much this is going to cost?

Are you SURE it hurts bad enough to see the doctor?

Going to the doctor is not an acceptable way to get attention.

Stop complaining, going to the doctor isn’t supposed to be fun, it’s always boring, and you’re the one who wanted to come here. So, here we are.

You better not be faking it.

If you’re foot isn’t seriously broken you’re going to be in a lot of trouble.

That’s the list of things that I tried NOT to say to my five-year-old daughter while waiting to see the doctor Monday. Such thoughts make me feel like a terrible mother, not to mention a lousy human being. No one should say such things to a hurt little girl, right?

Well, what if you highly suspect that the hysterical sobbing was just a demand for attention after she’d been practically slathered in attention while on vacation? What if you are being dragged away from work by pseudo-sobbing and almost pain? What if you keep remembering the dismissive way your own parents reacted whenever you felt pain and how devaluing it is to hear, “Oh, it doesn’t hurt that bad, you’re just faking it.”

As always I bring old issues to the table and it deeply effects the current situation. My husband was unsympathetic to my empathy for her pain and my unwillingness to simply ignore and dismiss it. He believes my reaction to her hysterical sobbing about her foot should have ended with, “it doesn’t hurt that bad.” Then refusing to discuss it further by ignoring all attempts at attention-getting. What he doesn’t understand is that was my first tactic.

However, after several hours of declared pain (actually 5 days) I started to think, “what if I’m wrong? What if it is broken? What if she remembers this forever and then brings it up for the rest of her life – the time her foot was broken and mom wouldn’t take her to the doctor?” In fact, my cousin remarked, (just minutes after my daughter jumped from the top of the stairs and missed the bean bag) “I’m two for two in telling them to suck it up and having it turn out to be broken.” She’s a pediatric nurse, so I asked her how I could tell. “You can’t, it has to be x-rayed.” Her son, wearing a toe brace, made it known this kind of thing isn't easily forgotten.

So, there I sat in the waiting room, knowing I was being played for attention and utterly furious about it. The longer I sat there the more furious I became. Then I realized my anger wasn’t really about my daughter, who is, after all, only 5-years-old and can’t discern the difference between “suck it up” pain and “go to the doctor “ pain.

My real issue is with the relationship the insured middle-class has with at the whole medical racket in general.

This is one of the ways we stay stuck, I thought. The reason we never get ahead is because I’m constantly sitting in these offices waiting for more unplanned medical bills. It’s never the co-pay is it? Well, that’s only $25. That can be absorbed. It’s all the extra crap they throw on for a couple hundred extra dollars that ruin a budget quick as light.

The doctor came in and vaguely, in a around about way, said that it probably wasn’t broken. But, he would hesitate to send me home without x-rays. “And how much is that going to cost?” I wanted to know. I’m not being sarcastic. I really, actually, want to know what the price per x-ray is. I think I’m entitled to such information considering I’m going to be required to pay the bill. I think I should have a right to assess the necessity of medical services based, in part, on the price of such services counterbalanced by the likelihood of there being a break.

Am I the only person in America who thinks doctors, clinics and hospitals should be required to disclose their prices, like every other industry in America? It’s illegal for my mechanic not to disclose his prices or give me a reasonably accurate estimate. Hairdressers post their prices on the wall. Have you ever asked a medical professional for a copy of their price sheet? They will let hell freeze over before any such information is handed over. Evidently it's impossible to tell what the actual price of medical procedures is until the procedure is over.

Of course the doctor said he "doesn’t know." Which, I personally, think is absurd. It is his business isn’t it? He or she does make a living off ordering medical procedures like x-rays. Wouldn’t you think you would take the time to figure out the actual price or at least a general going rate of an x-ray? I have yet to meet a doctor who actually knows what they are charging for any procedure. And let me assure you, I ask every single time. Every single time, they don’t know and they always, every time respond the same way:

“Aren’t you insured?” Or some variation like this doctor who asked if I was “underinsured” or they say, “I would imagine that your insurance covers it.”

All of which infuriates me because as I said before, what my insurance covers is relative. Relative in the sense that my insurance may cover certain procedures 80/20, but 20% of $1,000 is still $200 that I didn’t budget. Is that going to make me go bankrupt? Of course not. But it will throw our family finances off for this month and the next. That’s a couple of months we don’t save for a house, those are months we “cut back” on something else.

Then there are always the “I had my buddy look at it” bills. When I go to my hairdresser and she asks her assistant or co-worker to check out a color shade do I get a bill from her co-worker? No, I do not. When my mechanic asks his buddy to help him pull the engine from my car so he can work on it do I get a bill from his buddy? No way. So why is it acceptable for everyone in the radiologists’ office to gather around my x-ray, in which there is nothing suspicious or questionable and then individually send me a bill? Why is that ethical? Why should I pay for opinions I’ve never authorized? (Oh, but I did sign the blanket permission to treat form in order to be seen at all.)

This happened when my baby was born, this happened when the doctor ordered an MRI on me for unexplained dizziness, extra doctors and nurses send me bills when I get lab work done to test my iron levels. It happens so regularly that I believe it’s just considered “industry standard.” Add an extra $60. And if it is brokent you can count on a charge not only for the foot brace or cast, but the extra bill for whoever showed you how to put it on. God only knows whether that will be under or over $200 more.

Are all medical professionals sleazy scammers just trying to make a greedy buck? No, of course not. The doctor is motivated to order the x-rays because he doesn’t want to get sued for sending my kid home with a broken foot. As evidenced by the fact that he made it a point to tell me he was noting, “Mother refused x-rays” on the chart. He said, “Usually, I think people come to see me because they want me to order the x-ray.”

Well, I came because I want you to tell me that her foot is bruised and will feel better in a few days. I’d like to skip the unknown and unplanned costs associated with any x-rays.

The radiologists aren’t evil or malicious either. Nor are the medical billing managers.

There is no price sheet for procedures in medical offices.

There are deals made with insurance companies for how much doctors are allowed to bill them and bill the patient. The actual cost of labor and materials it takes to x-ray my daughter’s foot doesn’t have any relation to how much I’ll be billed.

The price is different for me than it is for you. The price is relative to what kind of deal the insurance company can make with the clinic’s billing staff (evidently, no doctors are involved in these negotiations because none of them have any idea how much any service costs). But their rules and regulations are so convoluted that medical professionals are, I would imagine, as mystified and frustrated as anyone else.

This is not evidence of a healthy medical system. This is evidence of a system in which no one, except the insurance company, is being served. The American people do not exist to serve insurance companies. It should be the other way around, the medical system in America should serve the people of America.

It’s NEVER just the copay. If it were, then I’d just suck it up.

BMI Red Zone


by Tracee Sioux

I find myself in a mothering predicament concerning the body weight and body image of my 5-year-old daughter.

My goal as a parent has always been to give my daughter a healthy body image. Make her feel like her body is exactly right, just as God gave it to her. Something to be taken care of, but not something to be obsessed about. At the same time, I didn't want to be burdened with a fickle eater. In other words, she eats what I make.

Last October the pediatrician told me Ainsley was in the "red zone" for her BMI. My goal, she said, was to keep her the same weight until the next October.

The "red zone" sounded dangerous and a lot like being overweight to me. While, she doesn't seem chubby or fat to my eyes, I don't like the sound of that at all. I just took her to the doctor for something unrelated and she has gained 3 pounds over the last 9 months, which alarms me.

I did some research and this is how the "red zone" is being explained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

"Based on the height and weight entered, the BMI is 18.6, placing the BMI-for-age at the 94th percentile for girls aged 5 years 9 months. This child is at risk of becoming overweight.

Although not overweight right now, this child has the potential for becoming overweight so prevention of excess weight gain is important. Children and teens should NOT be placed on a weight reduction diet without the consultation of a health care provider."

It seems difficult for me, as a mother, to determine exactly what action I should take about this. I admit to having been judgemental about mothers who refuse to allow their children sugar or sodas at birthday parties. The sugar-nazi mom always seemed to me over-controlling and over-anxious about every little thing their children put in their mouths. Of course, their children are probably not in the BMI "red zone." Mine is. So, now I feel bad about being judgemental about snack zealousness. I'm sorry.

Surely no one would believe that a child who loves, and I do mean loves, vegetables and fruit over anything else would be in the "red zone." I have the type of child who begs me for the giant bag of baby spinach and profusely thanks me for the frozen fruit and carrot sticks in the grocery cart. I'm not kidding. She knows what is healthy. She chooses healthy food for most snacks. We go through a buffet line and she fills her plate with veggies and fruits. I buy the "healthier" snacks like baked chips and nuts and fruit and say "no" at least half the time to her requests. I don't even buy juice to encourage more water drinking.

She's also not a huge television watcher. I admit that she's probably more sedentary than she should be. She enjoys academic kinds of fun, reading and writing and doing math puzzles. Seriously.

There is also only so much exercise to be had as a kid in America these days. Only irresponsible parents allow their kids to run around the neighborhood anymore, now that the neighborhoods are full of child molesters. (At least my neighborhood is, I looked it up on the National Sex Offender Registry) She's pretty much limited to the front yard and her only sibling is a baby who isn't allowed out of the house at all. She has no one to play with. Kids' sports and activities are expensive and time consuming. She's in soccer, but it's the off season. I try to take her to the pool and around the track at the gym (insurance won't allow her on the actual equipment) but it's very frustrating for me to waste my exercise time while she goofs off. I keep writing letters asking the gym to incorporate children's exercise so they don't sit there watching videos while I exercise. They finally did an exercise camp, but charged an extra $50. I already pay them $70 for a "family membership," just how much of my disposable income am I supposed to dedicate to the exercise of this family?

I do find myself struggling with an antiquated food ideology too. We regularly tell her to "finish your food," or "stop goofing off and sit down and eat." Mainly because you can't imagine how annoying it is to hear complaints of "I'm hungry" every half hour. I really need to learn to say, "too bad." Then I feel like a total hypocrite for snacking down on some baked chips or a small square of dark chocolate and not sharing.

There are a million reasons for not wanting your child to be overweight, not the least of which is this study in Radiancemagazine.com: “In a study done with six-year-old children, they were shown silhouettes of different people, then asked to talk about them. The children consistently labeled a silhouette of a fat child as ‘stupid, dirty, lazy, slow, etc.,’ regardless of the body size of the child identified in the picture." The same study provided evidence that teachers and other adults feel exactly the same way about overweight children.

The same article on MSNBC.com sites this: Study statistics are startling. According to BodyImageHealth.org, “almost half of normal-weight third- to sixth-grade girls say they want to be thinner; a third have already restricted their eating to lose weight, and 78 percent say they are very afraid of becoming fat.” How children view themselves is strongly influenced by parental body image, and often this is set by the age of six.

I must point out the connection here. Technically, my daughter is still in the NORMAL weight category. Yet, I've been warned by the pediatrician that I need to watch her weight and she's been put in an alarming sounding "red zone." No one is ever in a good place, an okay place, or a healthy place if they are in the "red zone." Why would you put such a dramatic color to something that is probably no big deal. Yellow would be a more appropriate color, or maybe a lovely orange. Almost alarming, but not quite. It seems logical that if the pediatrician persists in putting her in the "red zone" through the third-grade that she will pick up on my (given to me by the pediatrician) anxiety about her body weight and my monitoring of her food and activity and feel like she should be thinner. Of course she's going to be "very afraid of becoming fat."

After giving the issue a lot of thought I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing. I'll make a few changes to her activity level, no reading until she's run around the house at least three times. I've got to put my foot down somewhere or she'll be loathed by the other children and teachers.

Seriously, it's important to keep in mind that the "red zone" is still normal. There's nothing necessarily "wrong" with being on the larger side of being a normal child. I blame this on over correction of the child obesity problem. The medical profession is rightly concerned that so many children really are at an all time high for unhealthy weight. They are trying to prevent my daughter from actually having an issue by giving me a red flag "look out, potential problems ahead."

But, using words like lose weight, watching your weight, too big, chubby, fat, and all other size-conscious words would be a huge mistake. There is potential to turn a minor potential issue into a major problem of body image.

I'll heed their warning by sucking it up and sharing my expensive diet foods. I'll say "no" to 75% of her snack requests rather than just half of them. My husband and I will stop insisting that she "finish eating what's on her plate" (Seriously, come on, it's hard not to parrot the advice our parents gave us). I'll suck it up and pay for a few more exercise camps to tide us over until soccer season starts. Maybe I'll get my bike fixed and take her on a bike ride once a week. I'll take time away from work to take her to the pool several times a week.

But, I will not mention to her that she is in any body weight red zone. That would be a terrible idea which will make her feel perpetually overweight or in danger of becoming perpetually overweight for the rest of her life.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Fabulous! Festival

Fabulous! Festival, a blog carnival about fashion, has been issued by ICY over at Individual Chic. They are always kind enough to include me, even though some of my submissions question the value or place of fashion. I figure who better to make an impact on fashion culture than those who are actually interested in it? Besides, we all know it does matter. Whether that's right or wrong, if it didn't we'd all just wear the same jeans and t-shirts and have the same bob haircut. But, we like to express ourselves in with our own fashion sense, it's all just a matter of keeping it in perspective for our daughters (and our overall financial health).

This issue was supposed to be about handbags, of course, I submitted whatever I wanted anyway, because half the time I don't think the rules apply to me. The other half I'm irritated that you don't think they apply to you.

I just got a new handbag because I loathed the one I had. I am truly never satisfied with my purse. I am not a changer of purses to match my shoes and belt - so very Southern. I just want a cute functional one that goes with everything. It's hit or miss and after about 6 months I throw my purse away because I loath it so much. Of course, I don't buy expensive ones so I can just discard them.

Monday, July 9, 2007

Addiction Off

by Tracee Sioux

No really, I am a nonsmoker!

To understand just how complete my addiction to smoking was you should read I suck, in which I explain all the f*ed up reasons I completely and totally LOVED smoking.

I credit my non-smoking success to Chantix, a new little-advertised drug that seems to have "turned-off" my addiction. I am not clear how exactly it works, but I suspect it works on the addiction receptor of the brain. You smoke for the first week and then you don't want to smoke anymore. My own unscientific opinion is that smoking during the first week clues in the brain that this is the addiction that needs to be turned off. I am not a doctor so I can't get more scientific than that. But, I think there has been ample evidence to suggest that when a person becomes addicted to something whether it's a drug, alcohol or cigarettes there is a brain receptor which becomes "miswired" if you will and tells your brain "you must have this to lead a happy life."

In addiction recovery, they call it addict thinking or stinking thinking. In recovery one of the things you might learn is how to will yourself into a different thought process. While your brain continues to say, "You need a cigarette," you try to change the thinking to "cigarettes are bad for me" through repetition. It's effective, but it's a painful and tiresome process. It could take literally years of determinedly praying and willing for this method to really be effective. Those years, to my recollection of being dependent on anti-anxiety medication, are painful ones. In no way do they not suck. This pill, Chantix, took 2 months to change the actual thought process about my smoking addiction.

I feel completely cured of my 20 year addiction to cigarettes. I took this twice-daily pill for two months and I have no more need for cigarettes. I even went to visit my whole family for an entire week with a baby in a mini-van, usually a major trigger for me, and didn't even think about smoking. At no time did I want to kill any one of my relatives and no one wanted to kill me, at least not because I was jonesing for a smoke. Before, every time I tried to quit smoking my husband would stash one around the house to toss at me when he felt he couldn't take anymore crap without considering murder or divorce. (Total enabler.)

Considering my previous obsession and/or addiction to smoking my liberation from the habit is a miracle. Not a minor one either. The misery, crankiness, irritability of "trying to quit" for several years was terrible. Simply the fact that I couldn't stop thinking about them as something I needed, (even after quitting for nine months at a time during pregnancies) is a testament to how addicted I felt. After taking Chantix for an easy two months it is as though the addiction has been turned off. Also, I noticed that my desire for other addictive substances is being effected. For instance, my desire for drinking a beer or having a glass of wine has also been greatly reduced.

The relevant piece of information for the non-smoking general public here is that an addiction might be "cured" through medication. Think of the freedom this would provide for millions of people in America and around the world. If Chantix can do this for smokers, what might a similar drug do for the alcoholic? What about the crystal-meth addict? What about people in chronic pain from illness or injuries who avoid taking addictive medications they might safely use if there were a cure for addiction?

Who doesn't know an addict? Who doesn't love an addict? Who prays that their own addict might overcome their addiction? Think of all the people who wouldn't be in prison if they had freedom from their addictions? We could save millions of tax-payer dollars by curing people of their addictions with medication like Chantix. In 2007 alone the President's Drug Control Budget called for $12.9 billion to continue the war on drugs. Think of all the families that might be saved, divorces that might be avoided, children who wouldn't be abandoned, financial ruin that might be skirted if there was a cure for other addictions. Addicts might once again become productive citizens as opposed to the criminals addictions make them become.

I'm someone who has walked the path of being addicted and using substances to pacify feelings until becoming dependent on them. I can speak from a place where I know that addictions can be overcome through Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, therapy, faith, prayer, changes in lifestyle, stress management, rehab and just plain holding on to your ass through recovery, but it's not as easy as it looks. Some people just don't have it in them to do it without medication. Many die, many go to prison, many lose their children, many lose themselves, many stay shackled to their addictions even through sobriety, all are at-risk for relapse.

Medications like Chantix could prove to be a break-through in one of the most destructive health epidemics ever experienced - addiction.

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Maternal Disclaimer

Dear Extended Family,

If unhappy with this blog, and the opinions expressed herein, please contact me directly. My mother has no relationship to the blog, nor does she approve of the blog, nor is she responsible for the writings of her 33-year-old daughter.

From here on out, feel free to comment directly on the blog, send emails directly to the author, or pick up the phone and bitch me out in person should you feel inclined. Please do not contact my mother in any way about it. As she has no control over the actions, words or opinions of said daughter, not since I was about 14 at any rate.

Please note that this blog/blogger's intention is not to hurt anyone's feelings in any way. The intention of this blog is to express opinions about cultural, social, political and sometimes familial relationships. The opinions are designed to empower girls, and more specifically my daughter and myself.

It is also important and relevant to point out that I do not share a name with any of you. Therefore, you can rest in your anonymity. No one needs to know you're connected with me at all - unless you choose to share it with them. Your connection with me can remain a little secret if you wish - I won't out you.

It was very lovely to see all of you on the 4th of July. I had a lovely time and enjoyed everyone's company very much. For people who have hurt feelings or bear grudges you're amazingly adept at hiding them. I hadn't a clue a single one of you had even read this blog until someone told me this morning. Be so kind as to click on some ads while you're here, won't you?

Peace Out. See you next year. Drop by East Texas to visit anytime.

Love,
Tracee Sioux

Monday, July 2, 2007

Convoluted Government

By Tracee Sioux

I got this email from Population Connection, www.populationconnection.com, a watchdog group that monitors legislation concerning reproductive issues in the United States and around the world.

"Dear Tracee,
We wanted to update you about recent developments in the House of Representatives. Last Thursday, the House voted to exempt shipments of contraceptives from the provisions of the global gag rule. Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered language which would authorize the change. Population Connection urged a "yes" vote on the provision. It passed, 223-201. Representatives Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Bart Stupak (D-MI) then proposed an amendment to strike the new regulation. Population Connection urged a "no" vote on their amendment. That amendment failed, 205-218. That means there were 5 representatives who voted to change the regulation, and then immediately voted to change it back! In other words, they voted for it before they voted against it!"

In plain words, more girls and women in third world countries will now be empowered with contraception. That's a good thing!

Government action gets so convoluted with sneaky amendments and provisions stuck in seemingly unrelated legislation. It's common practice. Which is why most Americans feel unempowered when it comes to creating change in the government. That's why I like an email like this from a watchdog group every now and then. It helps me discipher some of the "we snuck it in" going on in congress. It's my right to know and, I think, my resposibility to find out. Sometimes that gets a little tricky.

Also, it allows me to track how my representatives are voting, which helps me see through campaign propaganda. Take this provision about the Global Gag Rule, for instance, why would Stupak and Smith oppose contraception? I think issues get turned to black and white or Rowe vs. Wade very easily. But, the reality is that though Stupak and Smith probably run on a Pro-Life platform, it's unlikely the majority of their voters are so extreme as to be anti-contraception. There IS a difference.

In fact there are a lot of differences: 1. contraception empowers girls and women, 2. paying for contraception is cheaper than paying for AIDs and HIV treatment or feeding orphans, 3. we shouldn't morally legislate for the whole world or they will hate us (remember those terrorists?).

I encourage you to find a watch dog group that monitors an issue you care about. Maybe healthcare? Then take action with a letter here or there to make a difference in government.

Monday, July 30, 2007

Long Distance Mothering


I recently met a woman who faced a fascinating dilemma. Would you consider mothering long-distance for a year?

by Tracee Sioux

Debbie Mahoney was a registered nurse who had gone as high as she could, having achieved a doctorate degree and completing post-doctoral work in nursing. She knew she was capable of more and wanted to pursue a career as a nurse practitioner.

In 1996 she applied for and won a fellowship from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, an organization "helping people to help themselves,” to pursue her NP license. The new status would double her salary, as well as open new professional doors for her.

“I knew I wanted to be a nurse practitioner,” Debbie said. “[The Kellogg Foundation] paid my salary and my schooling was free. I was totally relieved of work while going to school and it was something I had always wanted to do.”

The catch? She had to move from East Texas to North Carolina for one year. Which would have been no big deal for a single professional, but she had three children and a husband.

“Yes, it did occur to me to stay,” Debbie admits. “Part of it too was the honor to be awarded this type of fellowship. It was a big deal at work. We were caught up with the great honor.”

She went on. “Really, my children were supportive of me going and I asked each of them and they said, 'Go for it Mom. We’re proud of you.' It was a once in a lifetime deal. If I passed it up, it wasn’t going to come again.”

Her husband Tom, a nurse anesthetist, had a job he couldn't very well abandon for one year.

“My husband was very supportive because he knew this would advance my career,” Sarah said. “To be honest, I’m sure the fact that my salary was going to double and we had three kids to put through college was what made him think it would be such a good thing. We had been married for 22 years by that time, so I guess you could say our marriage had a baseline.”

Sarah and her family had 10 months to get ready for her year away from home. They went to family counseling and talked about how her leaving the family was going to affect each member.

“Our counselor was very supportive,” remembers Debbie. “He said, “If you don’t do it, you may always have regrets. He felt like our kids would benefit from my going in the long run.”

Not everyone was so supportive. Debbie remembers being confronted by a woman in her church, “How could you do this? How could you be such a terrible mother to go off and leave your family?”” she said. “That made me sad, I know there are traditional values. But, in my own spiritual life, I really felt like this was something God wanted me to do and that the Lord had gone before me and arranged everything.”

Joseph, now a 26-year-old married father of two with a masters degree in medical physics, was 16 when his mother left.

“I had no interest in going with her,” Joseph said. “At the time I resented it a little bit. I felt like I had two years left at home and she was going to be gone for one of them. But, I had no interest in going with her. I was well established at school and I was on the football team,” Joseph remembered.

“I don’t want to give the impression I was traumatized by it; by no means do I feel sorry for myself. But, I guess at the time I thought, well she’s doing what she wants to do and it doesn’t involve me or my dad or my sister. I was never angry about it, but it for a short time it was hard.

“I guess the question is, do you live to work or work to live?” Joseph said. “We were getting by pretty well. I looked at it like, she’s already got a decent job and our family wasn’t lacking. So it wasn’t something for her family. It was for her. I realize now our country and the world is not fair to live in and a lot of women have to make that choice. I don’t really think it would have been any different if it was my father that went to North Carolina. The role of a successful female never crossed my mind. It felt like putting work before family. I didn’t look at it as symbolic empowerment for women.

“But, there is no long-term damage to our relationship,” Joseph said.

Debbie made it clear that had it been Joseph’s Senior year in high school she would not have taken the fellowship. She also pointed out that Joseph had privileges, such as private college tuition, they wouldn’t have been able to provide without the extra salary.

Sarah, 13 at the time, had just made the cheerleading team at her junior high school and decided to stay home with her dad too.

“I was worried about my daughter a lot,” Debbie said. “The counselor had told me to hide little notes for her that she’d find along the way. I don’t think that really meant anything to her. I don’t think it was meaningful at all. She had a lot of strife going on with cheerleading that year, but even had I been at home, she wouldn’t have shared that with me. My daughter is not a person who opens up, she keeps things inside of her. So, I was most worried about her.”

Now 23-years-old, a daycare worker in Columbia, Missouri, Sarah said, “I was happy for my mom, but I was sad to see her go. I was really proud of her. It wasn’t really that hard, I was involved with school activities and we just went about our day to day routine, it was pretty cool. We got to see her every six weeks or two months so I didn’t feel like I was missing her too much.

“It really showed me that women can excel in the work force if you have those kinds of opportunities,” Sarah continued. “We grew up in a small town where typically the dad goes to work and makes the money and all the decisions. But, it was great to see my mom make her own decisions and pursue her own career.”

Steven, a 3rd Grader, moved with his mom. Mother and son agree the year was fantastic for him.

“I felt like he was always overshadowed by the other siblings so this was a great opportunity for him,” Debbie said. “I really think my three children are closer because of it. I think they missed their little brother and before most of the conversation at dinner was all about the two of them. My older son was a little bit of a bully to his little brother and when we went away and came back I think there was a whole new appreciation between the siblings.

“I think it was a good experience to live somewhere else,” Stephen, now a college freshman said. My school in North Carolina was all black, so that was a good experience too, to see some diversity other than what I had been exposed to at home.

“I was always closer to my mom, so I didn’t really miss my dad too much. But I probably would have been upset had my mom left me,” Stephen said.

Each of Debbie’s children said they would consider making a similar decision in their own future families if the opportunity presented itself.

Joseph said about his wife Deidre, also a nurse, “If she really wanted to do it, I wouldn’t want to hold her back. But, my wife has a very different personality than my mother.”

As a woman herself now, Sarah said, “Oh yes, I would do it. It was awesome. I would love to do something like that.”

For herself, Debbie feels professionally fulfilled and she doesn’t regret leaving her family that year.

“I teach in the graduate program at the University of Texas at Tyler and practice as nurse practitioner. I am able to go on mission trips with Refuge International where I can see patients and prescribe medication and perform small surgeries. I also sit on their board of directors,” Debbie said.

“Being a nurse practitioner has helped me offer more to the world, and my children, than I could have if I hadn’t done it,” said Debbie.

“I think it was definitely empowering to see my mom go for that year and we need more women like my mom out there,” said her daughter.

Photograph: Mahoney family picture taken at Joseph's graduation from Georgia Tech two months ago. He received a master's degree in medical physics. From L-R, husband Tom, Debbie, youngest son, Stephen, oldest son, Joseph, Joseph's daughter, Catherine, his wife Deirdre who is holding their son, Patrick, on the right is daughter, Sarah.

Sunday, July 29, 2007

delorie

delorie

Friday, July 27, 2007

Money & Happiness

by Tracee Sioux

One of the points Suze Orman brings up in her book Women & Money is that money matters. Money, she says, makes a fundamental difference in our happiness and our lives and to pretend that it doesn't is a great big lie. In fact, she says it might might be the source of dysfunction in our relationship with money.

We've all heard a million cliches, both Christian and otherwise, about money being unimportant.

Money can't make you happy.
Money isn't the most important thing.
You can't buy happiness.
It's the free things in life that count.
No one ever said on their death bed, wish I had spent more time at work.
The root of all evil is the love of money.
The widow gave her last mite, that's how much she loved God.
You can't take it with you.
Don't be such a Scrooge.
Don't be so money-hungry or greedy.
You can't out-give God.
She'll give you the shirt off her back.
She was so selfless.

Orman takes a bold approach to this kind of logic - it's flat-out wrong and if we could get rid of these guilty feelings about money then we might be able to develop a healthy relationship with money and stop being so irresponsible about it.

Everyone who lives needs money, she says. To pretend otherwise, is dishonest. The relationship we have with our money is an extension of the relationship we have with ourselves. If we are irresponsible about taking care of our money, we are irresponsible about taking care of ourselves. If we don't take care of ourselves then someone, our adult children, will eventually have to take care of us.

When are constantly taking care of others' needs financially, at the cost of our own financial needs it's a poor financial decision, she says. There is no wiggle room about this for Orman.

She very matter-of-factly states, nothing more directly affects your happiness than money.

She has a great list of ways the money is unimportant theory is a lie: health, love, and respect - can't have any of them without money, she says.

Health - if you get sick you must have money. If your family gets sick you must have money. Can you be happy without health? Not as happy as you would be if you had health or could afford to obtain health. Insurance costs money, doctors costs money, prescriptions cost money - you must have money to maintain a healthy life.

Love - Imagine staying in a relationship solely for love, because you have the money to stay or go. Imagine knowing that if you die those you love will be taken care of because you were responsible with money and didn't leave them with financial burdens.

Respect - You can't respect yourself if your financial life is out of control. You can't teach your children to respect you if you don't respect yourself enough to take care of yourself financially. You certainly can't teach your children to live within their means and live responsible disciplined lives if you don't do those things.

Reading this chapter in Women & Money was intense for me. I have a lot of money guilt, I think. I'm always deeply affected by all of those Christian cliches about money. At the same time I've discovered that what Orman is saying is true, money may not be able to buy health or happiness, but it sure would be a lot easier to pursue if an illness didn't bankrupt you.

It would be nice not to burden my children with my poor financial decisions. It would be great to send my children out into the world both able to make a living and able to wisely manage money. It would be great if I had older relatives who had paid more attention to their own money matters so I didn't have to spend so much of my energy worrying about them so much.

I would be delighted if when my daughter graduates from college she felt it within her grasp and within her rights to pursue money without guilt. After all, she's an American and we're all about the profit, right? Well, apparently some of us women, still need to work on that.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Vajayjay Talk

I have this friend who had a chronic terrible itchy horrible nightmarish recurring yeast infection for 3 years. Well, actually she thought it was a yeast infection, but she kept going to the doctor and the yeast infection culture kept coming back negative. He ran a bunch of tests and she tested negative for all the other vaginal infections as well. She was constantly spending money to try the Diflucan and the over the counter yeast infection medicine and none of it was really helping.

She noticed that it always flared up after sex. She started to think maybe it was psychosomatic, you know maybe her vagina was just getting pissed off about the nature of its sex life or something. Like that Sex in the City episode where Charlotte’s vagina gets depressed? Like that. Her vagina felt angry and pissed off more than depressed. It would wake her in the night screaming and agitated. This problem with her vagina was really getting to her, leaking into her personality and making her more frustrated and agitated than normal. Hell, can you imagine how frustrated and upset you’d be if YOU had an incurable yeast infection for 3 years?

Finally, after a couple of years of Ob/GYN appointments the doctor tells her that he’s giving her a prescription steroid – finally relief. The prescription was called clotrimazole.

A few months later her baby got a terrible diaper rash. The nurse said to go get Lotramine AF for his rash. The nurse also happens to mention, if it’s cheaper, she should buy the jock itch cream because it’s the exact same ingredients.

So she’s comparing prices and reads the ingredients and sees the familiar word clotrimazole on the jock itch cream. The same stuff her doctor prescribed for her itchy irritated vagina.

She goes home and asks her husband, Honey, do you have jock itch?

Yeah, why do you ask? he says.

We’re not having sex again until you go get a prescription for jock itch, she tells him.

There are three lessons to this story:

*Sometimes what feels like a chronic yeast infection could be jock itch being passed back and forth between you and your partner. Try the Lotrimin isle.
*A terrible diaper rash may also be jock itch, try the Lotrimin isle.
*For some reason, even the OB/GYN, a man specializing in the vagina and used to talking about a vagina's issues, was too embarrassed to tell the woman her diagnosis.

More candid talk about the vagina can only be more empowering for women and girls.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Empower Your Daughter With Health Insurance

by Tracee Sioux

I recieved an email is from MoveOn.org, a political action group monitoring healthcare. Right now Congress is deciding whether to a) take away healthcare from millions of children or b)allow millions more children access to healthcare.

No girl can be empowered if she can't even go to the doctor for her vacinations or minor injuries. No parent can be empowered if they feel they can't afford to take their kids to the doctor. Congress has until September to make a decision and they need to hear from you. As a citizen you have the right, and the responsibility, to make it known what you expect of them.

Sending petitions does send a message to Congress. They may not know your personal name, but they will know that millions of Americans are tired of seeing children go without healthcare.

Click on this link to encourage congress to vote to expand, rather than eliminate, healthcare for children.

If you're like me and you think perhaps signing a petition won't matter enough, you can also send a letter directly to your elected officials at Congress.org.

My letter said:

I expect you to vote in favor of expanding children's health care. We're a nation of Christians and Christians are supposed to care for others and help take care of others. There is no pursuit of happiness if you, or your children are sick. We, as a nation, are not designed to make sure insurance companies and doctors make more money. We, as a nation, are designed to take care of the people. A nation of the people, governed by the people, for the people is a nation that should take care of its people. Health care for the middle class is getting way too expensive, even for the insured. I expect you to pass the SCHIP resolution to expand coverage to more children. If you do not, you will lose my vote and anyone I can pursuade to join me.

Sincerely, Tracee Sioux

Feel free to copy and paste it into your own letter at Congress.org.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Teaching Frustration

by Tracee Sioux

In my quest to lower my 5-year-old daughter Ainsley's BMI and add more exercise I said yes to her request to attend yoga class with me this morning.

I am also teaching her to swim myself.

When I teach my daughter things I usually feel impatient and frustrated if it doesn't go exactly the way I want it to. In swimming she really just wants to goof off and won't ever listen to my instructions or follow them. In yoga she was fidgety and loud and disrupting the other ladies who were trying to get into their quiet place.

The worst part is that she is exactly like me as a learner. Difficult to teach. I learn through experimentation and trial and error and taking shortcuts. It's only in my 30s that I'm realizing the little details are important steps that are there for a good reason.

When I'm attempting to teach my daughter yoga, money or swimming I get frustrated, which is accompanied by a strange guilt.

It's a wonder my mother could teach me anything, I catch myself thinking. I've even caught my own self throwing up my arms in frustration and surrender, forget it, I've had enough.

It's like a mirror-image going two directions - one to the past with empathy for what my mother went through trying to mother me and one to the present with frustration while trying to deal with my headstrong daughter who just wants to learn through exploration.

I am really dedicated to overcoming the frustration. I realize, having been the daughter, that there is nothing wrong in learning through exploration. After all, I seem to have learned quite a lot.

I think the key is taking a step back during our lessons and following her. I need to accept that a person generally doesn't change the way they process information and certainly they never change the way they learn through exasperated sighs. But, hopefully, I can change my frustration level.

Monday, July 23, 2007

Day of Rest

By Tracee Sioux

Produce, produce, produce.

My husband and I tend to be workaholics sometimes. I constantly feel like I'm under pressure to get everything done. Especially since having another baby and working from home. I just feel like there is not enough time to do everything I need to be doing. I'm loving the work, and love being fed from this source of energy, but I'm imposing all this pressure to market and make the work profitable right now.

I found myself starting to wonder how long I can keep up this pace. It's only July and Ainsley isn't in school until September. My kids are sick of entertaining themselves and bored. Yet, I feel so newly driven, It feels great to be driven by my writing again. It is fantastic to feel passionately and write passionately.

But, it's the balance that is in question. I started to wonder when I'll ever get a break. When I'll ever have a moment to relax and just be.

Yesterday, the sermon was on the Sabbath. I thought, Well duh, the being and the resting is built right in if you would just listen! It's always been there. You're the one who has decided to ignore it.

While I am now late in publishing my blogs and haven't been to work out this morning and feel totally behind in my week. I also feel like stopping the productivity for one day really provided some perspective about balance.

I don't want my kids to feel so driven that they can't rest. I want them to understand and value a work ethic, but not at the cost of everything else.

It's funny how when you're a kid things like naps feel punitive. My daughter throws a massive fit at the mention of a nap (Zack still loves them). Keeping the Sabbath Day Holy was a big deal in my house growing up. I guess that did feel punitive and restricting to me then.

Now though, it's like free day, gift from God day, no pressure day, lazy rest day. My favorite day.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Cleanliness - Women & Money


By Tracee Sioux

One of the things I wish I had inherited from my own mother was cleanliness and organization. My mother is very clean, neat, tidy, and organized.

At a recent visit to my mother's house I saw that she had kept the original little people that went with the Little People Bus. All of them in good condition.

I could never have pulled that off. After picking up the same $1 store toy about 5 times I simply rid myself of it by throwing it in the garbage.

Suze Orman, in Women & Money, says that we can never become wealthy if we are not clean and don't take care of our things.

Let me first state that my home is not filthy. It is simply too small and there is no where to put things away. We've simply outgrown the house. There are also two small children running around getting stuff out all day long.

It's a total fiction that your home is cleaner if you stay-at-home or work-from-home. It is, in reality, much messier. Think about it, if you picked up the house, then left the house all day long it would be clean when you got back. However, if you're trying to write and there are two children at home all day then the only thing that can result is a messier house. Yes,I know that picture at the top looks bad. But, as I said, I can't write, keep two children occupied AND keep the house clean. If you can do it - well, good for you. I, myself, have limitations.

My car looks like a freaking garbage dump half the time. Frankly, I didn't care enough about that hideous old Oldsmobile to clean it. Too, I'm always exhausted when we get home so lots of stuff gets left in the car. Not to mention all the crap my kids are constantly dragging home. Why can't the school throw away all the drawings and coloring book pages? Why does it have to end up in my car and my house - am I supposed to keep every single thing they ever draw, write, glue or color? I don't have the space for that.

But, putting away my Shame & Blame as Suze recommends I realize I've got to stop making excuses.

But, I admit my attitude about things is getting in the way of better things.

First, obviously this is a good problem to have - not enough room for my stuff means that we've got more than enough stuff. We've got a plethora of stuff that is ripping the house apart at the seams. That means we are prosperous and should be grateful about our prosperity rather than complaining about it.

Second, I think we've got left-over feeling of lack around here. We had to do without lots of stuff for a while. And that translated into accepting every hand-me-down and gift offered. It also translated into us buying stuff we didn't really love or enjoy because it was "better than nothing."

Third, we feel like we're being ungrateful by cleaning out and getting rid of stuff. For instance, there were some lovely people who made Zack some blankets. In fact, so many people made Zack blankets that he never used several of them. I finally got the courage up to take them to the shed to be sold at a garage sale. Obviously not the ones my mother or grandmother made, but the ones the secretary at my husband's old job. I just don't have room for it. Likewise, I need to banish my emotional attachment to cute baby clothes that don't fit the baby anymore.

Fourth, what if it comes back in style? I have clothes I love and have pulled them back out for the second time now. But, really could I live if I had to buy another belt or a another top in 20 years when it came back in style? Is it costing me wealth to keep it around? I certainly don't have room for new stuff if I'm keeping all that old stuff around. And while we're talking about clothes I keep my fat clothes around too - just in case fattness overtakes me again. Well, since he got that vasectomy I don't intend to get fat from pregnancy again. So, maybe I could just commit to not needing the fat clothes again? Besides, it will serve me right to have to go buy some if I end up in size 16 pants ever again.

This is, I think, hanging onto old baggage and old issues. To change the way we feel about money we have to change the way we feel about the things money can buy. Hanging onto things we don't need anymore is just telling ourselves that we don't have enough. If we get rid of it, we will miss it. That's true in some cases, believe me I've rid myself of everything I owned several times and I DO miss some stuff.

But, most of the stuff - never thought about it again. Since the 8 qualities of a wealthy woman chapter the Suze Orman book I've hauled out 4 giant garbage bags of stuff to the shed to be sold at a garage sale. Money for a down payment on a bigger house.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Give Me An "A"


by Tracee Sioux

I've been super-conflicted about letting my 5-year-old daughter participate in cheerleading.

Isn't it better to be the one cheered on, the one actually playing the sport, than to be cheering from the side-lines? I think so. I want to see my daughter actively participating in athletics, not standing on the side of the game wearing a short skirt, bopping around, cheering for the team. The boys' team.

Have you ever seen a gang of boys jumping up and down cheering on a girl's soccer or basketball team? Never mind that cheerleaders stand on the side of football games where girls still aren't allowed. Also, in Texas cheerleading is highly competitive and I would argue, not the good kind. As a femimommy, I just hate the idea of cheerleading.

But, as I said in Red BMI, I need to actively seek exercise opportunities for her. The only options available were hip-hop and cheerleading. Then my friend said, Hey, let her come to my church's vacation Bible school, the theme is sports. She can choose soccer, t-ball, basketball or cheerleading.


If I thought I could get away with it, I wouldn't have told her she had the option of cheerleading. She's too smart to fall for that kind of crap. Instead, I listed the options.

She gave me a sly smile, knowing I would disapprove, and said, I want to do the cheerleading.

Have you ever wondered why girls should be cheering for boys, but boys don't cheer for girls? Do you think that's okay?

Mama, when I went to watch Eric play basketball Emma was cheering for a girls' basketball team.

Are you sure?

Well, you weren't there, but they had girls playing basketball and I think Emma was cheering for that team.

Do you think it's fair that only boys are allowed to play football but girls stand on the side and cheer for them?

I don't even want to play football, she pointed out.

When Emma took cheerleading, she informed me, they didn't wear belly shirts, they wore long ones and I don't think they did anything imapropriate.

My husband didn't think it was a big deal. My friend thought I was being too extreme. Both pointed out that boys cheer these days too. The difference is, there are not entire scantily clad gangs of boys cheering for the girls' teams.

In the end, neither argument swayed me in favor of cheerleading. What did sway me is that my particular girl wants to try it. She thinks it will be fun.

I decided it would be more empowering for her to be able to make her own decision about which sport to try than it would be for me to forbid cheerleading on a feminist principle.

She's just a different kind of girl than I was. She's more of a girly kind and I was more of a tom-boy. But, I don't think it would be empowering to make her feel bad about being a girly-girl.

The more I thought about it, I could trace my negative feelings about cheerleading back to the time my parents told me we were moving again to a town with a small enough high school, where I could make it as a cheerleader.

Upset about the umpteenth move, there I stood dressed head-to-toe in black, pale skin, red lipstick totally Mod screaming, "Why would I want to be a cheerleader?" What I really wanted to articulate was, "Have we met? Do you know anything about me at all?"

So, to avoid a similar episode with my daughter, I'll acknowledge that she is the kind of girl who thinks being a cheerleader is fun. And I'm going to get okay with that.

I did some research and according to the Official Cheerleader's Handbook, cheerleading was invented at Princeton in the 1860s by men. They didn't let girls do it until the 1920s when they added gymnastics and tumbling at the University of Minnesota. It was World War II, and no boys being available, that transitioned the sport to where 90% of cheerleaders became female.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Complaint Free House


By Tracee Sioux

Did you see that complaint free world bracelet on Oprah in March? It's this bracelet that brings focus to complaining to encourage you to stop.

I immediately ordered several of these bracelets, mostly because I'm sick to death of my daughter's complaining.

If there is something you don't like about your children I think if you look closely enough you'll realize they got it straight from you. Which sucks. Because to fix the problem in your child, you first have to fix yourself. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

Ainsley's complaining has reached epic proportions. I would say her complaining takes up the majority of the day. She's either complaining or I am correcting the complaining, suggesting she be happy or punishing the complaining for 50-75% of our interactions in the last month or so.

I'm a masterful and creative complainer and I guess if I really examine it I complain more than the average person. But, I justify it for this reason or that. My complaining doesn't bother me, it amuses me. I usually amuse other people.

Have I robbed my daughter of a positive outlook and an optimistic perspective with my hobby of complaining? It wouldn't be worth it then to continue my complaints. Ainsley isn't a naturally negative soul. She tends to say things like, Zack's crying sounds like music.

The question is, am I ready to give up complaining to save my daughter's natural optimism? Giving up complaining feels almost like giving up smoking. I feel like I need the complaining and that perhaps I won't be able to find ways to cope without it.

Even bigger, could I not complain about Ainsley's complaining? Would I even be able to have a conversation with her if I wasn't allowed to correct (read: complain about) her complaining?

Thank goodness the bracelet isn't here yet. I'm not sure I'm ready to give up my complaining fix yet.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Unrealistic Expectations of Perfection



By Tracee Sioux

I think Hillary Clinton should be the next president because it will change the potential of every girl in America. Changing the potential of every girl is changing the potential of half the population in America. That is not insignificant. I also happen to agree with her politics, but if she were a Republican, say Condoleeza Rice, current National Security Advisor, I would vote for her. I want to vote for a woman in 2008 because I want to empower girls.

The argument against Hillary Clinton I've been hearing from Republican women is upsetting me.

I would love a woman but not Hillary Clinton, she's not a very good role model.

What really irritates me about this argument is that these exact same women are totally fine with George W. Bush as a good role model. Hello, the man did cocaine and is a recovering alcoholic. He got a DUI for heaven's sake. And he's a good role model?

I'm trying to figure out how exactly Hillary Clinton is a negative role model and I'm coming up empty. Yeah, there was White Water, but I'm not clear anymore whether Hillary did anything wrong there. Martha Stewart actually went to prison for her financial scandal, but everyone's willing to let her go on with her career baking and cleaning and decorating.

Her biggest flaw, as far as I can tell, is that she's married to Bill Clinton and stayed even though he cheated on her in a very public and humiliating way. But, she's not the one who did anything wrong in that situation. He was the sleezeball there, all she did was not divorce him.

She had one child. Is it that she worked as a lawyer and made professional strides while mothering Chelsea? Is that the unforgivable as far as conservative women go?

Hasn't every president been professionally ambitious? Haven't they all been fathers with careers that often kept them away from their kids? I imagine Hillary, while being professionally ambitious, was most-likely even more pro-active about parenting Chelsea than any of the ambitious men have been about fathering their children.

Chelsea is not a child and seems to have survived her parents' marriage. She seems to have survived having a professional mother.

Why are the choices Hillary made as a mother getting in the way of her Presidential potential?

Why are women willing to let the work vs. stay-at-home mothering argument get in the way of finally achieving some gender-wide empowerment by being represented at the highest level of government?

I challenged a smart, thinking, former professional woman with why she thought George W. Bush was a good-enough role model, even though he had been an alcoholic with a DUI conviction and had used cocaine. She said she believed in redemption and thought changing his ways was being a good example.

I just wonder why she can't apply the same standard of good-enough to Hillary Clinton. Why can't the forgiveness and redemption extend to a woman candidate? I think it all goes to back to the unrealistic expectations women have for ourselves and each other. If we free ourselves of that burden we might actually be represented in government and therefore be empowered as a whole.

Gender equality is good for every woman and every girl. Whether a woman counts herself as a Conservative Christian Republican Stay-At-Home Mom or she writes her definition as a Liberal Angry Lesbian Childless Activist, empowerment is a good thing. The further one of us gets politically the more options and choices all of us have.

In the end we're all women and I think we can afford to be on the same team to further our collective empowerment. Hillary Clinton may not be the only path to empowerment, but she represents an available and achievable one right now.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

New Money

By Tracee Sioux

I found Chapter 1 in Women & Money: Owning the Power to Control Your Destinyboth validating and empowering. For me it was great to have my feeling of bluffing as a professional validated in a historical sense. Orman brings home the point that women have not, historically, filled the role of workers or the role of people who have their own money. When speaking of a collective conscience as females 25 years is like 5 minutes and the result is that our “new money” is still something we don’t really know how to handle yet.

This could not be more true. It’s also incredibly relevant when trying to empower a daughter. Since I am learning this for the first time I think it will be most empowering to my daughter to work out the kinks out loud. (Rather than whispering about money as previous generations have.)

Our girls need to understand that the world is still full of “firsts” for women. First woman Speaker of the House, Thanks Nancy Pelosi, first woman running for President, Thanks Hillary Clinton, etc. I think it would be a mistake not to give our daughters the historical perspective that we don’t have very much experience at incorporating work into our family lives and it’s frankly, difficult and full of sacrifices and unforeseen pitfalls.

Unrealistic expectations of perfection can be enormous burdens for women. We need to be careful not to pass our judgment about each others’ work vs. stay-at-home choices to our daughters. The most empowering thing to pass on to girls today is the awareness that they will have choices. Ideally, we can send them off into the world empowered to make either choice, whichever they feel most comfortable with or with whatever combination they can make work.

Either way, we need to send them into the world expecting to be valued whether they make money or not. Orman beings out the point that women are undervaluing themselves if they stay-at-home and don’t make money AND they are undervaluing themselves if they go out and work.

In Chapter 1 she also says this is only to be expected considering how new access to money is for women. Why would they know what to do with it or how to handle it? It’s not as if these lessons were ingrained in our collective consciousness for millennia as they were for men. It’s a great point.

Yet, for our daughters surely we can teach them better and give them sound words about money. I know the classic psychology of say Dr. Phil would have us believe that children shouldn’t be burdened with adult things like the family finances.

I would argue that such “protection” doesn’t empower our girls to go out into the world and make good financial choices. I think we should be working out the kinks “out loud” with our kids, daughters especially. How can we help them avoid financial pitfalls if we continue our bluff or never admit to mistakes?

On my mother's side I'm the first generation career woman. On my father's I'm the third. Either way, that's not much experience. But, my daughter will have me telling her what to watch for, what to think about, what to avoid and what to do. Hopefully, she won't feel so much like she's faking it.

For more on Chapter 1 and how we can get on the same side as women, check out BlogFabulous. By the way, this is the first time I’ve ever led a virtual book club (or any book club for that matter) so I am still working out the kinks of how to have an online conversation between two websites (maybe I should’ve just picked one, but it’s an important issue). Please cut me some slack.

Friday, July 13, 2007

Global Democracy Promotion Act


by Tracee Sioux

The American Government participates in legislating morality with unconstitutional things like the Global Gag Rule, which doesn't make us very popular in certain parts of the world.

The Global Gag Rule denies all funding (for every kind of aid including food) to any and every medical professional or organization if they say the word abortion. The Global Gag Rule is blatantly selective moral legislation. Aren't we supposed to be the beacons of free speech and democracy and freedom around the world? It completely contradicts itself. The Global Gag Rule is blatantly unconstitutional because we supposedly believe in the principle of freedom of speech, yet we deny funding to anyone who practices it. I question whether other countries hate us because we believe in freedom or because we insist on enforcing two-faced International policy like this.

It is absolutely not America's place to go around telling the rest of the world what the boundaries of morality are. We shouldn't go around demanding that every country on the planet adopt "right to life" policies. It's not our place to legislate their cultures. They are not so stupid as to believe it is our right - which is why it pisses them off.

It's anti-woman and anti-girl selective morality to ignore mass rape via ethnic cleansing and the selling of millions of girls and women for prostitution around the world, but then drawing a moral line at abortion. Perhaps if the United States wants to legislate morality we might decide to step in on behalf of women before the abortion is in question? You know, before they are beaten, raped and sold and become pregnant and infected with HIV and other STDs. Since we're not going to claim the human rights of women as our responsibility, we should just stay out of the morality legislation business all together.

The Global Gag Rule requires women and girls to carry their rapists' babies to term.
Population Control, a watchdog group monitoring reproductive freedom, sent me an email saying there is currently legislation before congress to finally do away with the Global Gag Rule. Below are the details and a link.

"A new bill, the Global Democracy Promotion Act (S. 1744), has been introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). This bill sets a simple standard: Restrictions we dare not impose on Americans should not be imposed on those who happen to live outside our borders. It will end the punishment of health care providers that observe the same standards of medical ethics and seek the same freedom of speech that apply in the United States. And it will end the use of American aid as a tool to stifle free speech and undermine medical ethics." via PopulationControl.org.

Do the right thing - Practice your Constitutional right to free speech and Open your mouth to stop the anti-girl, anti-freedom of speech, two-faced and hypocritical International policy of the Global Gag Rule. Sending a letter takes two seconds - just click here.

Read about how certain US Senators wanted to be so anti-girl as to forbid contraception as part of the Global Gag Rule. Then read how letters like yours and voices like yours stopped it from happening. You can and should make a difference.

Global Gag Rule IS Anti-Girl

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

It's NEVER The Copay

By Tracee Sioux

Your ankle better be broken.

Do you know how much this is going to cost?

Are you SURE it hurts bad enough to see the doctor?

Going to the doctor is not an acceptable way to get attention.

Stop complaining, going to the doctor isn’t supposed to be fun, it’s always boring, and you’re the one who wanted to come here. So, here we are.

You better not be faking it.

If you’re foot isn’t seriously broken you’re going to be in a lot of trouble.

That’s the list of things that I tried NOT to say to my five-year-old daughter while waiting to see the doctor Monday. Such thoughts make me feel like a terrible mother, not to mention a lousy human being. No one should say such things to a hurt little girl, right?

Well, what if you highly suspect that the hysterical sobbing was just a demand for attention after she’d been practically slathered in attention while on vacation? What if you are being dragged away from work by pseudo-sobbing and almost pain? What if you keep remembering the dismissive way your own parents reacted whenever you felt pain and how devaluing it is to hear, “Oh, it doesn’t hurt that bad, you’re just faking it.”

As always I bring old issues to the table and it deeply effects the current situation. My husband was unsympathetic to my empathy for her pain and my unwillingness to simply ignore and dismiss it. He believes my reaction to her hysterical sobbing about her foot should have ended with, “it doesn’t hurt that bad.” Then refusing to discuss it further by ignoring all attempts at attention-getting. What he doesn’t understand is that was my first tactic.

However, after several hours of declared pain (actually 5 days) I started to think, “what if I’m wrong? What if it is broken? What if she remembers this forever and then brings it up for the rest of her life – the time her foot was broken and mom wouldn’t take her to the doctor?” In fact, my cousin remarked, (just minutes after my daughter jumped from the top of the stairs and missed the bean bag) “I’m two for two in telling them to suck it up and having it turn out to be broken.” She’s a pediatric nurse, so I asked her how I could tell. “You can’t, it has to be x-rayed.” Her son, wearing a toe brace, made it known this kind of thing isn't easily forgotten.

So, there I sat in the waiting room, knowing I was being played for attention and utterly furious about it. The longer I sat there the more furious I became. Then I realized my anger wasn’t really about my daughter, who is, after all, only 5-years-old and can’t discern the difference between “suck it up” pain and “go to the doctor “ pain.

My real issue is with the relationship the insured middle-class has with at the whole medical racket in general.

This is one of the ways we stay stuck, I thought. The reason we never get ahead is because I’m constantly sitting in these offices waiting for more unplanned medical bills. It’s never the co-pay is it? Well, that’s only $25. That can be absorbed. It’s all the extra crap they throw on for a couple hundred extra dollars that ruin a budget quick as light.

The doctor came in and vaguely, in a around about way, said that it probably wasn’t broken. But, he would hesitate to send me home without x-rays. “And how much is that going to cost?” I wanted to know. I’m not being sarcastic. I really, actually, want to know what the price per x-ray is. I think I’m entitled to such information considering I’m going to be required to pay the bill. I think I should have a right to assess the necessity of medical services based, in part, on the price of such services counterbalanced by the likelihood of there being a break.

Am I the only person in America who thinks doctors, clinics and hospitals should be required to disclose their prices, like every other industry in America? It’s illegal for my mechanic not to disclose his prices or give me a reasonably accurate estimate. Hairdressers post their prices on the wall. Have you ever asked a medical professional for a copy of their price sheet? They will let hell freeze over before any such information is handed over. Evidently it's impossible to tell what the actual price of medical procedures is until the procedure is over.

Of course the doctor said he "doesn’t know." Which, I personally, think is absurd. It is his business isn’t it? He or she does make a living off ordering medical procedures like x-rays. Wouldn’t you think you would take the time to figure out the actual price or at least a general going rate of an x-ray? I have yet to meet a doctor who actually knows what they are charging for any procedure. And let me assure you, I ask every single time. Every single time, they don’t know and they always, every time respond the same way:

“Aren’t you insured?” Or some variation like this doctor who asked if I was “underinsured” or they say, “I would imagine that your insurance covers it.”

All of which infuriates me because as I said before, what my insurance covers is relative. Relative in the sense that my insurance may cover certain procedures 80/20, but 20% of $1,000 is still $200 that I didn’t budget. Is that going to make me go bankrupt? Of course not. But it will throw our family finances off for this month and the next. That’s a couple of months we don’t save for a house, those are months we “cut back” on something else.

Then there are always the “I had my buddy look at it” bills. When I go to my hairdresser and she asks her assistant or co-worker to check out a color shade do I get a bill from her co-worker? No, I do not. When my mechanic asks his buddy to help him pull the engine from my car so he can work on it do I get a bill from his buddy? No way. So why is it acceptable for everyone in the radiologists’ office to gather around my x-ray, in which there is nothing suspicious or questionable and then individually send me a bill? Why is that ethical? Why should I pay for opinions I’ve never authorized? (Oh, but I did sign the blanket permission to treat form in order to be seen at all.)

This happened when my baby was born, this happened when the doctor ordered an MRI on me for unexplained dizziness, extra doctors and nurses send me bills when I get lab work done to test my iron levels. It happens so regularly that I believe it’s just considered “industry standard.” Add an extra $60. And if it is brokent you can count on a charge not only for the foot brace or cast, but the extra bill for whoever showed you how to put it on. God only knows whether that will be under or over $200 more.

Are all medical professionals sleazy scammers just trying to make a greedy buck? No, of course not. The doctor is motivated to order the x-rays because he doesn’t want to get sued for sending my kid home with a broken foot. As evidenced by the fact that he made it a point to tell me he was noting, “Mother refused x-rays” on the chart. He said, “Usually, I think people come to see me because they want me to order the x-ray.”

Well, I came because I want you to tell me that her foot is bruised and will feel better in a few days. I’d like to skip the unknown and unplanned costs associated with any x-rays.

The radiologists aren’t evil or malicious either. Nor are the medical billing managers.

There is no price sheet for procedures in medical offices.

There are deals made with insurance companies for how much doctors are allowed to bill them and bill the patient. The actual cost of labor and materials it takes to x-ray my daughter’s foot doesn’t have any relation to how much I’ll be billed.

The price is different for me than it is for you. The price is relative to what kind of deal the insurance company can make with the clinic’s billing staff (evidently, no doctors are involved in these negotiations because none of them have any idea how much any service costs). But their rules and regulations are so convoluted that medical professionals are, I would imagine, as mystified and frustrated as anyone else.

This is not evidence of a healthy medical system. This is evidence of a system in which no one, except the insurance company, is being served. The American people do not exist to serve insurance companies. It should be the other way around, the medical system in America should serve the people of America.

It’s NEVER just the copay. If it were, then I’d just suck it up.

BMI Red Zone


by Tracee Sioux

I find myself in a mothering predicament concerning the body weight and body image of my 5-year-old daughter.

My goal as a parent has always been to give my daughter a healthy body image. Make her feel like her body is exactly right, just as God gave it to her. Something to be taken care of, but not something to be obsessed about. At the same time, I didn't want to be burdened with a fickle eater. In other words, she eats what I make.

Last October the pediatrician told me Ainsley was in the "red zone" for her BMI. My goal, she said, was to keep her the same weight until the next October.

The "red zone" sounded dangerous and a lot like being overweight to me. While, she doesn't seem chubby or fat to my eyes, I don't like the sound of that at all. I just took her to the doctor for something unrelated and she has gained 3 pounds over the last 9 months, which alarms me.

I did some research and this is how the "red zone" is being explained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

"Based on the height and weight entered, the BMI is 18.6, placing the BMI-for-age at the 94th percentile for girls aged 5 years 9 months. This child is at risk of becoming overweight.

Although not overweight right now, this child has the potential for becoming overweight so prevention of excess weight gain is important. Children and teens should NOT be placed on a weight reduction diet without the consultation of a health care provider."

It seems difficult for me, as a mother, to determine exactly what action I should take about this. I admit to having been judgemental about mothers who refuse to allow their children sugar or sodas at birthday parties. The sugar-nazi mom always seemed to me over-controlling and over-anxious about every little thing their children put in their mouths. Of course, their children are probably not in the BMI "red zone." Mine is. So, now I feel bad about being judgemental about snack zealousness. I'm sorry.

Surely no one would believe that a child who loves, and I do mean loves, vegetables and fruit over anything else would be in the "red zone." I have the type of child who begs me for the giant bag of baby spinach and profusely thanks me for the frozen fruit and carrot sticks in the grocery cart. I'm not kidding. She knows what is healthy. She chooses healthy food for most snacks. We go through a buffet line and she fills her plate with veggies and fruits. I buy the "healthier" snacks like baked chips and nuts and fruit and say "no" at least half the time to her requests. I don't even buy juice to encourage more water drinking.

She's also not a huge television watcher. I admit that she's probably more sedentary than she should be. She enjoys academic kinds of fun, reading and writing and doing math puzzles. Seriously.

There is also only so much exercise to be had as a kid in America these days. Only irresponsible parents allow their kids to run around the neighborhood anymore, now that the neighborhoods are full of child molesters. (At least my neighborhood is, I looked it up on the National Sex Offender Registry) She's pretty much limited to the front yard and her only sibling is a baby who isn't allowed out of the house at all. She has no one to play with. Kids' sports and activities are expensive and time consuming. She's in soccer, but it's the off season. I try to take her to the pool and around the track at the gym (insurance won't allow her on the actual equipment) but it's very frustrating for me to waste my exercise time while she goofs off. I keep writing letters asking the gym to incorporate children's exercise so they don't sit there watching videos while I exercise. They finally did an exercise camp, but charged an extra $50. I already pay them $70 for a "family membership," just how much of my disposable income am I supposed to dedicate to the exercise of this family?

I do find myself struggling with an antiquated food ideology too. We regularly tell her to "finish your food," or "stop goofing off and sit down and eat." Mainly because you can't imagine how annoying it is to hear complaints of "I'm hungry" every half hour. I really need to learn to say, "too bad." Then I feel like a total hypocrite for snacking down on some baked chips or a small square of dark chocolate and not sharing.

There are a million reasons for not wanting your child to be overweight, not the least of which is this study in Radiancemagazine.com: “In a study done with six-year-old children, they were shown silhouettes of different people, then asked to talk about them. The children consistently labeled a silhouette of a fat child as ‘stupid, dirty, lazy, slow, etc.,’ regardless of the body size of the child identified in the picture." The same study provided evidence that teachers and other adults feel exactly the same way about overweight children.

The same article on MSNBC.com sites this: Study statistics are startling. According to BodyImageHealth.org, “almost half of normal-weight third- to sixth-grade girls say they want to be thinner; a third have already restricted their eating to lose weight, and 78 percent say they are very afraid of becoming fat.” How children view themselves is strongly influenced by parental body image, and often this is set by the age of six.

I must point out the connection here. Technically, my daughter is still in the NORMAL weight category. Yet, I've been warned by the pediatrician that I need to watch her weight and she's been put in an alarming sounding "red zone." No one is ever in a good place, an okay place, or a healthy place if they are in the "red zone." Why would you put such a dramatic color to something that is probably no big deal. Yellow would be a more appropriate color, or maybe a lovely orange. Almost alarming, but not quite. It seems logical that if the pediatrician persists in putting her in the "red zone" through the third-grade that she will pick up on my (given to me by the pediatrician) anxiety about her body weight and my monitoring of her food and activity and feel like she should be thinner. Of course she's going to be "very afraid of becoming fat."

After giving the issue a lot of thought I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing. I'll make a few changes to her activity level, no reading until she's run around the house at least three times. I've got to put my foot down somewhere or she'll be loathed by the other children and teachers.

Seriously, it's important to keep in mind that the "red zone" is still normal. There's nothing necessarily "wrong" with being on the larger side of being a normal child. I blame this on over correction of the child obesity problem. The medical profession is rightly concerned that so many children really are at an all time high for unhealthy weight. They are trying to prevent my daughter from actually having an issue by giving me a red flag "look out, potential problems ahead."

But, using words like lose weight, watching your weight, too big, chubby, fat, and all other size-conscious words would be a huge mistake. There is potential to turn a minor potential issue into a major problem of body image.

I'll heed their warning by sucking it up and sharing my expensive diet foods. I'll say "no" to 75% of her snack requests rather than just half of them. My husband and I will stop insisting that she "finish eating what's on her plate" (Seriously, come on, it's hard not to parrot the advice our parents gave us). I'll suck it up and pay for a few more exercise camps to tide us over until soccer season starts. Maybe I'll get my bike fixed and take her on a bike ride once a week. I'll take time away from work to take her to the pool several times a week.

But, I will not mention to her that she is in any body weight red zone. That would be a terrible idea which will make her feel perpetually overweight or in danger of becoming perpetually overweight for the rest of her life.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Fabulous! Festival

Fabulous! Festival, a blog carnival about fashion, has been issued by ICY over at Individual Chic. They are always kind enough to include me, even though some of my submissions question the value or place of fashion. I figure who better to make an impact on fashion culture than those who are actually interested in it? Besides, we all know it does matter. Whether that's right or wrong, if it didn't we'd all just wear the same jeans and t-shirts and have the same bob haircut. But, we like to express ourselves in with our own fashion sense, it's all just a matter of keeping it in perspective for our daughters (and our overall financial health).

This issue was supposed to be about handbags, of course, I submitted whatever I wanted anyway, because half the time I don't think the rules apply to me. The other half I'm irritated that you don't think they apply to you.

I just got a new handbag because I loathed the one I had. I am truly never satisfied with my purse. I am not a changer of purses to match my shoes and belt - so very Southern. I just want a cute functional one that goes with everything. It's hit or miss and after about 6 months I throw my purse away because I loath it so much. Of course, I don't buy expensive ones so I can just discard them.

Monday, July 9, 2007

Addiction Off

by Tracee Sioux

No really, I am a nonsmoker!

To understand just how complete my addiction to smoking was you should read I suck, in which I explain all the f*ed up reasons I completely and totally LOVED smoking.

I credit my non-smoking success to Chantix, a new little-advertised drug that seems to have "turned-off" my addiction. I am not clear how exactly it works, but I suspect it works on the addiction receptor of the brain. You smoke for the first week and then you don't want to smoke anymore. My own unscientific opinion is that smoking during the first week clues in the brain that this is the addiction that needs to be turned off. I am not a doctor so I can't get more scientific than that. But, I think there has been ample evidence to suggest that when a person becomes addicted to something whether it's a drug, alcohol or cigarettes there is a brain receptor which becomes "miswired" if you will and tells your brain "you must have this to lead a happy life."

In addiction recovery, they call it addict thinking or stinking thinking. In recovery one of the things you might learn is how to will yourself into a different thought process. While your brain continues to say, "You need a cigarette," you try to change the thinking to "cigarettes are bad for me" through repetition. It's effective, but it's a painful and tiresome process. It could take literally years of determinedly praying and willing for this method to really be effective. Those years, to my recollection of being dependent on anti-anxiety medication, are painful ones. In no way do they not suck. This pill, Chantix, took 2 months to change the actual thought process about my smoking addiction.

I feel completely cured of my 20 year addiction to cigarettes. I took this twice-daily pill for two months and I have no more need for cigarettes. I even went to visit my whole family for an entire week with a baby in a mini-van, usually a major trigger for me, and didn't even think about smoking. At no time did I want to kill any one of my relatives and no one wanted to kill me, at least not because I was jonesing for a smoke. Before, every time I tried to quit smoking my husband would stash one around the house to toss at me when he felt he couldn't take anymore crap without considering murder or divorce. (Total enabler.)

Considering my previous obsession and/or addiction to smoking my liberation from the habit is a miracle. Not a minor one either. The misery, crankiness, irritability of "trying to quit" for several years was terrible. Simply the fact that I couldn't stop thinking about them as something I needed, (even after quitting for nine months at a time during pregnancies) is a testament to how addicted I felt. After taking Chantix for an easy two months it is as though the addiction has been turned off. Also, I noticed that my desire for other addictive substances is being effected. For instance, my desire for drinking a beer or having a glass of wine has also been greatly reduced.

The relevant piece of information for the non-smoking general public here is that an addiction might be "cured" through medication. Think of the freedom this would provide for millions of people in America and around the world. If Chantix can do this for smokers, what might a similar drug do for the alcoholic? What about the crystal-meth addict? What about people in chronic pain from illness or injuries who avoid taking addictive medications they might safely use if there were a cure for addiction?

Who doesn't know an addict? Who doesn't love an addict? Who prays that their own addict might overcome their addiction? Think of all the people who wouldn't be in prison if they had freedom from their addictions? We could save millions of tax-payer dollars by curing people of their addictions with medication like Chantix. In 2007 alone the President's Drug Control Budget called for $12.9 billion to continue the war on drugs. Think of all the families that might be saved, divorces that might be avoided, children who wouldn't be abandoned, financial ruin that might be skirted if there was a cure for other addictions. Addicts might once again become productive citizens as opposed to the criminals addictions make them become.

I'm someone who has walked the path of being addicted and using substances to pacify feelings until becoming dependent on them. I can speak from a place where I know that addictions can be overcome through Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, therapy, faith, prayer, changes in lifestyle, stress management, rehab and just plain holding on to your ass through recovery, but it's not as easy as it looks. Some people just don't have it in them to do it without medication. Many die, many go to prison, many lose their children, many lose themselves, many stay shackled to their addictions even through sobriety, all are at-risk for relapse.

Medications like Chantix could prove to be a break-through in one of the most destructive health epidemics ever experienced - addiction.

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Maternal Disclaimer

Dear Extended Family,

If unhappy with this blog, and the opinions expressed herein, please contact me directly. My mother has no relationship to the blog, nor does she approve of the blog, nor is she responsible for the writings of her 33-year-old daughter.

From here on out, feel free to comment directly on the blog, send emails directly to the author, or pick up the phone and bitch me out in person should you feel inclined. Please do not contact my mother in any way about it. As she has no control over the actions, words or opinions of said daughter, not since I was about 14 at any rate.

Please note that this blog/blogger's intention is not to hurt anyone's feelings in any way. The intention of this blog is to express opinions about cultural, social, political and sometimes familial relationships. The opinions are designed to empower girls, and more specifically my daughter and myself.

It is also important and relevant to point out that I do not share a name with any of you. Therefore, you can rest in your anonymity. No one needs to know you're connected with me at all - unless you choose to share it with them. Your connection with me can remain a little secret if you wish - I won't out you.

It was very lovely to see all of you on the 4th of July. I had a lovely time and enjoyed everyone's company very much. For people who have hurt feelings or bear grudges you're amazingly adept at hiding them. I hadn't a clue a single one of you had even read this blog until someone told me this morning. Be so kind as to click on some ads while you're here, won't you?

Peace Out. See you next year. Drop by East Texas to visit anytime.

Love,
Tracee Sioux

Monday, July 2, 2007

Convoluted Government

By Tracee Sioux

I got this email from Population Connection, www.populationconnection.com, a watchdog group that monitors legislation concerning reproductive issues in the United States and around the world.

"Dear Tracee,
We wanted to update you about recent developments in the House of Representatives. Last Thursday, the House voted to exempt shipments of contraceptives from the provisions of the global gag rule. Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered language which would authorize the change. Population Connection urged a "yes" vote on the provision. It passed, 223-201. Representatives Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Bart Stupak (D-MI) then proposed an amendment to strike the new regulation. Population Connection urged a "no" vote on their amendment. That amendment failed, 205-218. That means there were 5 representatives who voted to change the regulation, and then immediately voted to change it back! In other words, they voted for it before they voted against it!"

In plain words, more girls and women in third world countries will now be empowered with contraception. That's a good thing!

Government action gets so convoluted with sneaky amendments and provisions stuck in seemingly unrelated legislation. It's common practice. Which is why most Americans feel unempowered when it comes to creating change in the government. That's why I like an email like this from a watchdog group every now and then. It helps me discipher some of the "we snuck it in" going on in congress. It's my right to know and, I think, my resposibility to find out. Sometimes that gets a little tricky.

Also, it allows me to track how my representatives are voting, which helps me see through campaign propaganda. Take this provision about the Global Gag Rule, for instance, why would Stupak and Smith oppose contraception? I think issues get turned to black and white or Rowe vs. Wade very easily. But, the reality is that though Stupak and Smith probably run on a Pro-Life platform, it's unlikely the majority of their voters are so extreme as to be anti-contraception. There IS a difference.

In fact there are a lot of differences: 1. contraception empowers girls and women, 2. paying for contraception is cheaper than paying for AIDs and HIV treatment or feeding orphans, 3. we shouldn't morally legislate for the whole world or they will hate us (remember those terrorists?).

I encourage you to find a watch dog group that monitors an issue you care about. Maybe healthcare? Then take action with a letter here or there to make a difference in government.