The Electric Company [PBSKids]
New 'Electric Company' (All Together Now) HEY YOU GUUUYS! [EW]

Says film producer Laylee Olfat: "A conversation stops when it comes out that I don't have kids or plan to have kids. So I have found other ways to authentically open doors. I relate to their stories or offer to hang out with their kids." Okay, fair enough. For years women have had to try and "man up" to compete in Tinseltown; now powermoms get to exclude the childless. Except the paper actually prints these words:

But the ultimate nod to the potency of the mama mafia is that guys are now lining up to kiss the ring. Just as women once practiced putting to hit the links with male clients, dads are quick to bring up organic diapers and car seat recalls during meetings.

Yeah, it's not really cool unless men are doing it, too.

Hollywood's Mommy Mafia [LA Times]

The Times piece, unsurprisingly, is a cute collection of yuppie-kids-say-the-darndest things anecdotes; children berating their parents for taking wasteful baths or allowing delivery services to use plastic bags. Inundated with green messages at school, on TV, and surely from their families, these kids have taken to greening with an evangelical zeal that allows for no compromise. Often, the bemused parents say, the one track mindset, however virtuous, leads to embarrassment when kids lecture neighbors, or discomfort when they want expensive innovations like Hybrids and solar panels.

Of course, what the piece does not acknowledge is that these kids — whose parents answer to descriptions like writers, stay at home moms, "a professor of furniture design," and "an executive with a solar energy company" — are hardly the norm. They live in brownstone Brooklyn neighborhoods and prosperous commuter suburbs. I very much doubt that children from lower-income families, whatever they are learning at school, are as prone to pester their parents for such worthy luxuries as solar panels. After all, what the children in this piece are doing, quite obviously, is parroting the essential worldview of their parents —albeit with a kid's simplistic, inflexible and ultimately purer mindset. The parents' feigned bemusement doesn't do much to hide their evident pride in their children's civic-mindedness. Yes, it's very cute that one little girl dries her clothes on a clothesline in her room, or another won't let her parents buy an SUV. But it's a lot easier when you have the option of a dryer on cold mornings, and the money to buy an SUV if they wanted, to say nothing of small changes like energy-efficient light bulbs and "walking to school" instead of driving. These are luxuries. Necessary ones, ultimately, but the tone of the piece still rubs me the wrong way.

Look, it's amazing and encouraging that children care about the environment, and their awareness augurs for a responsible stewardship. But it's not really news that the children of wealthy, environmentally-conscious parents have developed a similar awareness, untempered by adult constraints. So much more interesting would be to see whether a similar awareness has developed in other communities, or families where green concerns were not necessarily a priority for older generations. In other words, whether there's actually been any change. The piece touches on some peoples' concerns that teaching "greening" in public school is a waste of taxpayer dollars, especially when math and reading are lagging; I'd be much more curious to know how much time such initiatives are even getting in the schools where those scores are lowest. Kids imitating their parents is not news. Kids being self-righteous tyrants, as I know all too well, is pretty old news, too.

Pint-Size Eco-Police, Making Parents Proud And Sometimes Crazy [NY Times]

What: A distasteful nanny with a penchant for sunflower seeds and male porn.

Where: Levin Playground in Central Park

When: Today, (Wednesday, October 1, 2008) at about 10:30 AM

Who: A woman of about 30 years of age with dishwasher blonde hair, frumpy, wearing a plaid man's shirt over a blue t-shirt. She removed the plaid shirt, revealing the t-shirt for some part of her time, including a time when she meandered over to the children to check on them and she was bra less; and if ever I have seen a woman more in need of a bra, then it would have to have been when my 83 year old demented, mother-in-law once appeared in my kitchen stark naked, but I digress. This woman was oddly proportioned to say the least. Her legs were rather slim, but her mid section was rather large and her chest was gigantic. So gigantic, that she became a spectacle as she jostled (picture water balloons bustling about under cheap cotton). The woman was shameless. She returned to her seated position to carry on a conversation with a woman of the approximate same age. The other woman had a distinct, Polish accent. The woman with the mammoth chest was wearing Lee blue jeans and tennis shoes with a graffiti design. After being drawn to stare at the woman after watching her walk shamelessly across the playground, I honed on her activities to try and figure out her story. It was pretty evident that she was a nanny. She had a stack of magazines that included a large word search puzzle, an O magazine and some sort of Male men's magazine. I am not sure of the title but I have the distinct impression it was a pornographic magazine intended for homosexual men. I thought it in poor form for her and her friend to giggle and fawn over the pictures during broad daylight on a children's playground. I can't say she was especially a bad nanny. She did check on the children and knew where they were the whole time. On a side note, the entire time she was there, she ate sunflower seeds. It was a pretty disgusting spectacle. She was using a pepsi can as a make shift spittoon.

Levin Playground In Central Park NYC [I Saw Your Nanny]

Matching Outfits: Parents putting siblings in coordinating ensembles is "creating an identity for the family - and managing its public image." Not to mention undermining a child's sense of individuality! There's a reason school uniforms are good for discipline.
Translation:The Control Freak.
Offender: FLDS families, Captain Von Trapp, Joe Jackson, Four Cohans, The Shaggs

Dressing a Child Like Yourself: "The motivation behind such a move comes down to possession and identity..'It's like you are saying they are a chip off the old block. The child is a blank canvas and you are projecting yourself on to them.'"
Translation: Total narcissist.
Offender: Christmas card families, Katie Holmes, Four Cohans

Bygone Fashions: Dressing your children in the clothing of another era "is often about taking a stance against what is perceived to be declining social standards." It can also denote a wish to keep them from growing up too fast.
Translation: Delusionals who need to get some Madame Alexander dolls, stat.
Offenders: Tasha Tudor, whoever Baby Jane's mother was.

Dressing Kids Like Grownups:Putting your kid in designer duds "is often down to a parent's own unfulfilled hopes and dreams." And, 'They are turning the child into what they wanted to be, but usually didn't become.'"
Translation: Narcissists with misplaced values, but who want the best (shallow) things for their kids.
Offenders:Amanda Wingfield, Mrs. Bennett, most of Hollywood.

Gender Extremes:Putting tots only in pink or blue "can come down to trying to control who your child will become when they grow up....'Gender is a big part of this and dressing their child according to gender stereotypes sends out a message about they see them and how they want people to react to them. '"
Translation: Latent sexism and homophobia? Or just an excess of Disney movies.
Offenders: Larry Birkhead, Cathy Hilton, Barbie and Skipper's mom.

What Were Your Parents Thinking? [BBC]

Okay, seriously. There is no doubt that the bag is gorgeous, but I can hardly focus on it because I'm all, OMG puppy!!! Oh, are there shoes on this page? I didn't notice. And that is saying something.

Convertible tote, $228; well-bred mary-janes, $368.

Puppy! And the bag is adorable, too.

Chintz leather duffel, $188.

What we have here is a situation in which I am going to purposely ignore the hideous shoes and focus on the flowing locks of the Afghan hounds instead. Pretty!

Best-in-show boots, $318; ruffle row peep-toes, $138.

You're supposed to be looking at the belt, the bag and the shoes, not the children! But it's tough not to want to play in a treehouse in herringbone trousers now. Sigh.

Treehouse belt, $128; quilted corona bag, $448.

Well, shit. When Beyoncé had little girls wearing grown-up clothes I was annoyed; this picture just makes me go, "squee!" This girl is badass and I want to read her blog.

Flowering vine necklace, $58.

Dear silver shoes: Will you be mine?

Cherry-picked boots, $228; mercurial mary-janes, $128.

El oh el.

I might want all catalogs to have kids and dogs now.

Even though I consider Mrs. Roper to be one of my style icons, I have issues with jewelry like this. Bulbous baubles are ethereal on some people, but this necklace would make me look like a deranged mental patient. Also, if it looks like 75¢, it ought to cost 75¢.

Pearl menagerie necklace (glass, cotton, lucite, wood, brass), $68.

Oh, are we wearing blush on our temples now? I did not receive that memo.

Anthropologie [Official Site]

[Los Angeles, September 13. Image via x17.]

And in case you felt compelled to write in anonymously to a website to report some possible neglect: none of the nannies pictured is engaged in texting, yelling or inattention — capital crimes in the ISYN universe.

I Saw Your Nanny [Official Site]

Earlier: ISYN Update: Bad Perm And Stroller In Street Spark Frenzy!
I Saw A Crazy: Nanny Policing Goes Off The Rails

[Beverly Hills, September 7. Image via x17.]

Single mothers by choice are often second-guessed by people who think they can't handle the job. Turns out men come in for such second-guessing too. Adam Pertman of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute says that men run into the stereotype that “Women are better nurturers. Why would a man want to raise a child?” So while single mothers get pegged as lonely or selfish, single fathers are chromosomally unprepared or possibly unmanly.

Single dad Gene Flanders says strangers are likely to assume he doesn't know how to raise his son. When he let his baby boy taste some butter from his finger at a restaurant, “one woman almost reached up to stop me — little slights like that.” Of course, women get plenty of criticism for how they raise their kids. But it's worth noting that the same annoying stereotypes that make men out to be Neanderthals who can't make their own dinner may also damage their ability to be fathers.

And we should be supporting this ability! Why? Well, because experts say that single parents "can still raise children successfully, if they enlist the support of family and friends to help provide a nurturing environment and structure." And because supporting single fatherhood means affirming men's capacity to raise kids without a woman in the house, which is good for gay couples.

But this is Jezebel, and since we are feminazis who only care about women, let's get to the point! Take a look at that picture above. It's lawyer Steve Harris wearing a business suit, sitting in a posh office — with his baby. If that were a woman, the article would probably be about how impossible it is to juggle personal and professional responsibilities, and how she's worried her child will grow up damaged because of their high-powered career. But the NYT offers the following description of Harris's lifestyle: "His office now looks different. He’s brought in a playpen; there are toys and books, all there in case the nanny calls in sick." So, uh, he adapted to his situation and somehow manages to balance family and career (albeit with a nanny)? Shocking!

Single parenthood is still associated with a disempowered group in society — women, and often poor women at that. But if a powerful group — professional men, often the only ones who can afford six-figure surrogacy fees — joins in, perhaps raising a child on one's own will receive much-needed legitimacy. If besuited dudes in Manhattan juggle story hour and billable hours, perhaps society will wake up to the fact that women have been doing this for years, and doing it without raising a generation of axe murderers. And more importantly, perhaps when more men become single parents, less fortunate single parents will get more of the resources they badly need — like child care, health care, and other services that can be difficult to afford when you're raising a kid on your own. So kudos to the Steve Harrises of the world, not only for doing a tough job all by themselves, but for potentially making that job a little easier for others.

The Bachelor Life Includes A Family [NY Times]

I love cardigans. Love them! Sometimes I shy away from yellow because I'm not sure it can be worn with black without being all bumble-bee-ish. But this works! And it want it.
Featherweight merino sweater, $88; abstract rose-print dress, $165.

Sometimes a girl in a tie is too "Hi, my name is Marcy, may I take your order?" But this is just added interest. And! The tights! Unexpected color, so chic.
Boatneck city tee, $35; felted wool mini, $98.

Another cardigan. But with rust-colored corduroys, and not in a third grade way.
Lydia blouse, $88; stretch vintage matchstick cord, $$79.50; Serengeti midheels, $175.

Pout! This is how I want to dress. Like I am a pulled-together adult woman with a job. Instead, I lean towards muumuus and track pants. I just decided, this very minute, that I need a blouse.
Isabel blouse, $88; seaside wave locket, $55; serge pencil skirt, $128.

Okay, never mind. This is how I want to dress. Casual elegance. Easy sophistication. Half uptown, half downtown. Haha, who am I kidding? I like kitsch and platforms and drama. But a girl can dream…
Sequined chiffon-ruffled cardigan, $110; slim stretch shirt, $59.50; distressed vintage slim jean, $135.

Gorgeous! Note to self: Play with tones and textures, pair shiny with nubby/matte. Covet those dotty little heels.
Wool-cashmere shawl-collar cardigan, $145; cotton-silk lawn twisted-placket shirt, $68; trixie heels, $248; sharkskin skirt, $165.

Another tie. I think we can agree that Avril Lavigne does not own this look, that we can take it back. Am I wrong? I just think this looks sharp. I love an ensemble with a little wink, a little something that makes it different and unique. But even without the shirt and tie, this dress is great: Versatile and plain old cute.
Dream Silvie dress, $138.

You guys, I don't even like kids. Not really, anyway. I mean I used to, but then I spent so many years babysitting I got kind of burned out. But this! This is just… Sigh.

Gah. My ovaries!

Oh! Well! Hello there! I'd like to place an order for delivery…

[J. Crew]

"nanny sighting logo About 11:45 A.M. on Monday 8/11/08 Gladwyne, PA. I saw an overweight caucasian female with blond hair and a bad, frizzy perm pushing a dark bluish stroller down Conshohocken State Road towards the Post Office. She was wearing an indescript dark green t-shirt, jeans and white sneakers.

This road is only one lane each way - with no sidewalks. She was pushing the baby going the same way as traffic. Cars and trucks (it's a major thoroughfare) were whipping around them.

I was sick when I saw this. It may as well have been a freeway. It is an extremely dangerous road. There have been many accidents and deaths on it, and it is very twisty as well.The baby had light brownish/blondish hair and looked not more than about a year old. She had on a pink foral shirt, denim clamdigger looking shorts, and soft leather pink shoes. They went into the post office where the woman spent quite alot of time. Baby was very antsy and unhappy. The woman thrust a piece of paper at the baby (in a very exasperated way) to try to distract her. Not even a toy, but a post office pamphlet or something to that effect. As a mother I would never expect for someone to put my child in such a dangerous situation as this. I am assuming this was a nanny as this particular location is extremely wealthy, and she did not have the appearance of a resident."

Comment Digest:

"This post bothered me. Not because of the person pushing the stroller. But the description of this individual. And to automatically asssume it was a nanny because of her appearance. That seems a little stuck up to me. Maybe, shes a struggling mother, who doesn't have a car at her disposal. And she can't help it if theres no sidewalk. Maybe, instead of writing on here, you can call the town up, and mention that you see people walking on the side of this dangerous road. And suggest they put in a sidewalk. Thanks"

And:

"Appearance of resident= stuck up, sexually frustrated, miserable human being. And FYI, darling, while Gladwyne is certainly no ghetto, it is not nearly as nice or 'wealthy' as you think it is."

And:

"when we see people puttiing children in harm's way or neglecting them, we usually see them in the ugliest of lights. that's the truth. deal with it."

And:

"I'm sorry but the author of this post sounds like a stuck up snob. "a bad, frizzy perm" ...well what if she liked her perm that way?! and overweight? I'm sorry that not everyone has the perfect body, and I'm sorry...some overweight frizzy haired people can be wealthy, or maybe she had to walk farther then that "wealthy" neighborhood because maybe that was her own kid and she HAD to walk and didn't really have a choice whether or not she had to be on the road.people driving need to look out for pedestrians no matter what, no matter how curvy the road may be."

I Saw Your Nanny

Earlier: I Saw A Crazy: Nanny Policing Goes Off The Rails

Jamie didn't want surgery, but when she heard about the less invasive Essure, a metal coil that creates scar tissue in the fallopian tubes, she was intrigued. She did a lot of research, especially on post-sterilization regret, which for young women seems to be greatest if you've already had children. Then she met with a doctor who she feared would turn her away because of her age. He did ask her a lot of questions (including the rather offensive, "What if you met a billionaire who wanted to have kids with you?"), but he eventually approved her for the procedure.

I drove her to the appointment and waited at the clinic while she had the device inserted. I won't say it wasn't a weird experience — the clinic also did cosmetic surgery, so it was kind of a palace, and I sat there reading Vogue while my friend got screws shoved up her reproductive organs. For her part, she says it didn't hurt at all. They did have to dilate her cervix and pump her uterus full of water, so she came out a little nauseous and tired, but in good spirits.

The real fallout came when she told her parents. Her mom cried, and asked why she couldn't "just let her life unfold" the way other people did. Up to that point I'd been totally on board with Jamie's decision, but her mom's tears gave me a twinge of doubt. I wondered if I'd helped her carry out a choice she'd later regret.

But Jamie tells me she doesn't even think of it as a choice. When a gay friend of hers found out about her parents' reaction, he told her it sounded a lot like coming out. She was revealing "an important fact about who she was, that couldn't be changed, and her parents didn't want to accept it." She believes the desire not to have children can be something innate, as basic as the urge to procreate. On the question of kids, she says, "sometimes the answer is just no."

Her parents aren't the only ones who disapprove. Even the nurse at the clinic assumed Jamie was "done having kids," and was taken aback when Jamie explained that zero was enough for her. Jamie says most people see not wanting kids as a function of youth, not a deeply held conviction. When I asked how she felt about explaining her sterilization to people, she told me this: "Does it need to be defended? No. But people will feel entitled to an explanation, and you can get mad about that, or you can think of something to say." Which seems pretty good way to think about any big decision in your life, especially if it sets you apart from what people think of as normal.

*Not her real name.

The BBC talks to Patrick Boyle, who is getting married later this year. Only close family members will be allowed to bring kids, because Boyle doesn't want his wedding to "resemble Disneyland." Plus: "Catering firms still charge for kids meals as much as adults." On the other end of the spectrum is Rhonda Williams, who refused to attend the wedding of a close friend. "The invitation said 'absolutely no children,'" she says. "It was quite aggressive and there was no explanation. So immediately we were slightly put on the defensive about it."

On one hand, a wedding is inherently self-absorbed: It's your day! With your music, your favorite cake, your huge dress and posse of bridesmaids. And these days, you're probably paying for it, too. So of course you can ban kids if you want! On the other hand: Is it mean? Cruel, even, to assume that people will attend your nuptials, buy you a gift and hire a babysitter? Isn't a wedding ultimately about family and unity and inclusiveness, not exclusivity?

Should Children Be Banned From Weddings? [BBC News]

And Italy, (where the birth rate is now about 1.3) isn't the only sumptuous locale where the birth rate is falling drastically short of the 2.1 "replacement rate": Greece and Spain are low on kids, too. But not, somehow, by choice: a European Commission survey found that the average European woman wants 2.36 children — and in Italy the answer was actually higher than average! But here's the catch.

According to Hans-Peter Kohler of the University of Pennsylvania, analysis of recent studies showed that “high fertility was associated with high female labor-force participation . . . and the lowest fertility levels in Europe since the mid-1990s are often found in countries with the lowest female labor-force participation.” In other words, working mothers are having more babies than stay-at-home moms.

How can this be? A study released in February of this year by Letizia Mencarini, the demographer from the University of Turin, and three of her colleagues compared the situation of women in Italy and the Netherlands. They found that a greater percentage of Dutch women than Italian women are in the work force but that, at the same time, the fertility rate in the Netherlands is significantly higher (1.73 compared to 1.33). In both countries, people tend to have traditional views about gender roles, but Italian society is considerably more conservative in this regard, and this seems to be a decisive difference. The hypothesis the sociologists set out to test was borne out by the data: women who do more than 75 percent of the housework and child care are less likely to want to have another child than women whose husbands or partners share the load. Put differently, Dutch fathers change more diapers, pick up more kids after soccer practice and clean up the living room more often than Italian fathers; therefore, relative to the population, there are more Dutch babies than Italian babies being born. As Mencarini said, “It’s about how much the man participates in child care.”

In other words:

By this logic, the worst sort of system is one that partly buys into the modern world — expanding educational and employment opportunities for women — but keeps its traditional mind-set. This would seem to define the demographic crisis that Italy, Spain and Greece find themselves in — and, perhaps, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and other parts of the world.

Put another way, stay away from Catholics, Asia hands and maybe classics majors. Society doesn't want their genes anyway. (Guess who's hereby off the hook?) Go find a Danish boyfriend and move to Italy once you're officially Euro! There's your pregnancy pact.

No Babies? [NYT Mag]

Tiny Voices Defy Child Marriage In Yemen [NYT]

Related: Mayor Plans of "Listening Posts" On Teen Pregnancy [Gloucester Times]

My best college friend, the one who got married in Israel, she's apparently breastfeeding. I just got an email about the kid. 10 POUNDS 2 OUNCES?? Oh, phew…C-section. What's so wrong with C-sections anyway? What's so wrong with baby formula? French women supposedly smoke throughout pregnancy so their babies will be smaller. True story. Not that that keeps French men from fucking around on their wives. But the women, they fuck around too. Maybe they have more options what with their preserved vaginas? Maybe it's all just really fucking hard. Maybe this is why dick size is so important, even though it's not, not now anyway. Maybe dying alone is just fine.

Okay, and maybe British men all have really small cocks and that would be the problem here.

"Have you ever fucked a tart who's had a kid?"
"No."
He didn't hear and turned to me mouth ajar. I shook my head." Well I…" He zig-zagged crazily, squeezed between a taxi and a newspaper van, and drifted two-wheeled up queensway.
"Well I fucking have, and it's no joke. Don't know you're there."
…
"Like waving a flag in space.
…
"Their guts flop, too. Jen'll be okay for one, maybe more.
"No fuck."
"I said she could adopt some, but tarts like having babies.
"Their cunts…" He flicked off the heater. "Turn to mush."
"Tits"
We pulled away
"Smell of bad milk. And they hang. Pancake tits."
Really?
"Yur."
"Jungle tits. But I thought, Fuck it. Jen's all right. Firm. And I don't fuck her that much now."

Ring Of Fire [Elle]
The Rachel Papers [Amazon]

76% of American moms are still having sex 2-5 times a week, even with their babies bawling in the background. In addition, only 24% of women fantasize about fucking the delivery man. Slate's XX factor wonders if Cookie's upscale demographic is skewing the statistics towards cheating. Hanna Rosin describes the Marc Jacobs-obsessed six year olds featured in Cookie and posits, "A mom who sends her 6-year-old to school looking like an expensive hooker could certainly not be expected to put up with a little middle-aged husband paunch or to resist the come-on from the hot new Israeli gym teacher." Hahaha, what would the 1939 Marital Rating scale have to say about that?

1939 Marital Rating Scale For Wives [Boing Boing]
Are YOU Having An Affair? [Slate]
Sex And The American Mom Survey [AOL/Cookie]

Related: Little Britain: Meeting The Parents [YouTube]

Earlier: Teenage Tourette's Sufferers Say What's On Their Minds

(Click any picture to begin the gallery or enlarge image; if you're having trouble seeing all the pics or want to see them in an entire gallery form, click here.)

Earlier: Screw Nicole Richie: It's All About The 8-Year-Olds

Somehow, someone, somewhere, forgot to give me the pill from the bottle whose label read: "You've just had a baby, from now on your aversion to all things cute, cuddly or smothered in teddy bear pattern will be forgotten. Go forth and spend a fortune on useless furnishings and ugly-coloured plastic items. Everything you thought you knew about how ' you wanted your home to look is wrong. Oh, and if it's a girl, prepare to like pink."

When Rattray's daughter was too big to be bathed in the sink? "I was tempted by the practical white number that sits on top of your bath. Unfortunately, in the flesh the object in question has all the elegance of a plastic garden pond. I'm not paying £20 to ruin one of my favourite rooms, so it's back to the sink and hope she doesn't grow any more." How realistic! And loving!

Ultimately, Rattray learns to tolerate her daughter. "Harper has discovered the art of bashing using a sweet little wooden [car] with red wheels. Trouble is, it's our Barber Osgerby Loop coffee table she's chosen to practice on. The plywood surface now has several deep dents on it..." (The car "mysteriously migrates" to another room.) But hey, Harper, when you get older, mommy might buy you a $33,000 Eames playhouse. Not that you'll be allowed to play with it.

My New Baby Is Destroying My Perfect Designer Home [Independent]
Nesting With A Vengeance (And a Deadline) [NY Times]
The £17,000 Wendy House: Why The Luxury Kids Market Is Booming [Times of London]

By the way, I agree with another mother quoted at the end of the NPR piece. Sarah Pekkanen told Aubrey, "I would be much quicker to jump on my kid for saying an unkind thing,even if he used perfect language to do so." I'm still not allowed to tell people to shut up!

Why Kids Curse [NPR]

Recent news reports claim that women should expect giving birth to be incredibly hurty. They say that these days, "the gulf between a woman's expectations of what will happen during labour and the reality is now so wide that many need to be prepared for the worst." To this I ask, where are these women's mothers? My mother told me that when she was giving birth to me she begged for more drugs and kept yelling over and over again, "GET IT OUT!"

But besides the searing pain, what else should be known? Do you start emitting supernaturally powered farts? Does your hair get really shiny? Do you really start craving pickles? We want answers!

'What To Expect' Readies For A Rebirth [Publishers Weekly]
Women Should Be Warned That Childbirth REALLY Is Painful, Say Medical Researchers [Daily Mail]

According to the Financial Times, there's a charity in the UK, Oxpip, devoted to helping parents in their relationship with their babies. Researchers believe that early relationships shape an infant's brain and nervous system; babies born to parents with attachment disorders often have emotional and mental health problems later in life. It's enough to make you wonder if you should just skip the mommy thing, especially if you're not naturally a "baby person."

I'm one of those people who doesn't just automatically like babies. I can recognize a cute baby when I see one (Zahara!), but I'm not "into" infants. (My sister, who is in veterinary school, is the same way, and has been known to declare: "I don't like baby humans.") I'm neither married nor at the point in my life where I'm seriously considering having kids, and the lukewarm (at best) feelings I have about babies make me wonder if I even want to have any. Ever. But saying so makes me feel vaguely guilty. Should a woman who is reluctant about motherhood have a baby anyway? And if you have a child and feel a sense of regret, are you a bad mother?

Women Who Aren't Cut Out For Motherhood [Times of London]
Welcome To The Nuthouse [Salon]
When The Magic Of Motherhood Is Missing [Financial Times]
Related: Oxford Parent Infant Project

Anyway, this is one of those stories that purports to expose all the good-intentioned parents of the world for the clueless not-so-greatness of their intentions, but as it was written by a New York parent, it misses an important point, which is to say, the reason little kids feel guilty about lying to their parents is because they have no grasp of how much other little kids lie to their parents. So around eleven years old, once they discover how shitty other kids are — their first taste of moral relativism — they go on a little lying rampage, until around fourteen or fifteen, when they realize how shitty all their friends' parents are — their second taste of moral relativism. After that kids pretty much lie in accordance with some constantly changing perception of how relatively shitty their friends are, how shitty their friends' parents are, how shitty they think you are, and whether the differential in their friends' parents' real estate holdings and yours might suggest one set of parents is bigger suckers. In other words: don't raise your kids in New York. But if you're reading New York, you probably knew that already.

Are Kids Copying Parents When They Lie? [NY Mag]