Going to Class

Today we tried out a free trial toddler tumbling class. I had mixed feelings. I knew this would either be great or it would be disaster.

As we walked in Mark wanted to run off and play like he does for open gym. I had to stop him. This was not a good start to our class. The teacher said Hi to Mark and then invited the group of 4 toddlers aged 1-2.5 to follow her and find a spot on the floor (there were literal spots on the floor). The other 3 followed and quickly picked out a color. Mark looked right at her and said “No!” and ran to the foam pit! Once again I had mixed feelings. Part of me was so proud. He was interested in something else and wasn’t going to let some random lady he never met tell him what to do. But I was also embarrassed to be “That mom” with “That kid.”

I pointed out the circles on the floor to him and he was a little more interested. First they sang a song and he just stood off a little ways watching. Then they did a few minutes of stretching, which luckily  was (thanks to Tae Kwon Do) something I could do. So I sat him in my lap while I did the stretches. Eventually he did grab his toes, and he liked doing the butterflies. But toddlers don’t naturally put their legs straight out in front of them and Mark wasn’t going to have any part of that.

Next they headed to the bars, where she explained 4 different stations and basically in a kind way told me to make my kid do it. “Mom, help Mark grab the bars.” My kid was saying “No” and I wasn’t going to just ignore that. I did my best using the little animals she had out to make the bars interesting. It worked and he grabbed on a few times, but mostly just wanted to run away. I ended up just holding him most of the time.

Next was the tumble track. What a surprise,  he didn’t want to do it! He wanted to jump on the trampoline and guess what, he was ACTUALLY jumping! He’s never done that! And the teacher says “Mom, help Mark come over here and learn” I just wanted to look at her and shout “Damnit he is learning!!!” But I didn’t. I just picked him up and held him so he wouldn’t encourage the rest of the class to think for themselves. At this point I whispered in his ear “I’m so sorry buddy. Just try and hold still a little longer, I won’t make you ever come back.”

Eventually he did want to do the tumble track, but he just wanted to run down it and there were all these structured things she wanted them to do and she grabbed him and forced him to put his feet in a hoop on the ground while she said “inside” and then told me “He’s learning inside and outside” and I just nodded while I thought, “No he isn’t, he’s learning not to trust you.”

After that she FINALLY let them go in the foam pit! Mark was so happy! Then she announced “One minute to explore the squishy!”  Seriously, you finally let him do what he wants and you are going to drag him out after 1 minute?? Well after that she blew bubbles so it was pretty easy to get him out. At least the bubbles were timed well. But then she quickly put them away and all the kids seemed confused (one even found the bubbles and took them and was ridiculed for it, I thought it was pretty smart). Once again as soon as they all liked and got involved in something she stopped it.

Next was the little obstacle course that the other kids seemed to really like, but Mark was only mildly interested in. He did like doing the balance beam and was surprising good at it! After that came the best quote of the class, “Now time for 5 minutes of creative free play learning!” I could only chuckle at that statement. Basically she should have said, “I’m going to stop hindering you from learning now!”

Mark ran right to the trampoline he wanted to go on the whole time and jumped the whole 5 minutes away! Then the weirdest part happened. She took out a box and shook it and all the little kids (except Mark) came running. It was like trained dogs, I wanted to hurl. I let him keep jumping a little longer so I could see what was in the box before I took him over. I was worried it would be candy or fruit snacks or something. It was hand stamps and she was stamping the kids feet and hands, so I took Mark over where he reluctantly got a cow stamped on his hand then realized what it was and wanted his other hand done! The teacher asked for a high five and he high fived the stamp box!

I wished so bad I could let him play a few minutes more but we had to pack up and leave. I stopped by the front desk to tell them the class was way too structured and we would not be joining and got out of there.

Today At The Convention….

I stand on principle, that principle being freedom. That is why I take the time and money to come to events like the Libertarian National Convention. This is my 3rd national convention, my 2nd as an adult. I’ve been to more sate conventions that I can remember. I am a libertarian and I support those people that support the libertarian platform most closely. When it came to the race for President that was without a doubt R. Lee Wrights, who wants to end income tax, end government education, end the fed, and end social security. Gary Johnson on the other hand wants many of these things to stay. He believes social security is salvageable and should continue to exist, he wants to end the department of education…. and give education to the states. I say give it to the parents! He claims he is anti-tax, yet he proposes a large national sales tax.

Somehow, he managed to woo everyone (apparently with his “electability” which means nothing to me) and is our candidate. ANOTHER REPUBLICAN. I’m not sure if he will get my vote this fall. It will depend on many factors.

When Lee lost the presidential nomination he threw his hat in the vice-presidential race, and lost (by a much smaller margin) to Judge Jim Gray. Besides one issue (jury nullification), Gray is very much a libertarian. In fact I think he would have made a good VP for Lee… But we’ll leave my dreams out of this.

After those races were voted on and wrapped up fairly quickly and cordially we moved on to the race for National Chair. I was not expecting this to turn into what it did. I was unhappy with the choices, but I really thought someone else would step up at the last minute and I’d have more libertarian choice. I refused to vote for anyone  already on the LNC (besides Mary Rewart) because they allowed the travesty that is the “floor fee.”  That is, this year it cost $94 just to go on to the floor as a delegate and vote. It is basically a poll tax, that in effect, makes the libertarian party not open to all libertarians. This to me is just unacceptable. Getting to the convention is hard enough already, but even those with low funds manage to do it by driving to the convention and staying at budget hotels or even camping (though I haven’t heard of anyone doing that this year. Maybe those folks couldn’t afford the floor fee). The convention is the one event that needs to be open to ALL members! What is the party with out the regular people? They argue this is to cover costs, but the basic convention costs should be covered by donations, dues, special packages, etc…. The convention is the most important event of the year, its worth paying for.

I was NOT The only one who refused to vote for the two people running, the current chair and the current vice-chair. It was suggested that someone speak for NOTA, None of the Above, an option that is on every ballot at the Libertarian National Convention.

You can see what happened here http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/05/anarchy-at-the-libertarian-party-convent But be aware the story in the article isn’t exactly right. Reason seems to have an issue with getting their facts straight (see my previous post). None expected Lee to run or accept a nomination until AFTER Mark Hinkle was eliminated and it was clear just how little support the two candidates had. I still haven’t heard directly from him, but even if he doesn’t I still expect someone better than the status quo to step up.

I voted for and supported NOTA because I don’t support those who think its OK to keep libertarians out of the convention. We need as many here as we can get and this “floor fee” has been a disaster from the beginning. When the LNC had the chance to get rid of it (after many complained) they didn’t. If they don’t listen to us and represent us they need to go.

After several votes and re-votes and recounts. We ended the day with Mark Rutherford one vote shy of what he needed to win.

I could hardly believe it when I saw this. To win you need 50% + 1. Rutherford was literally 1 vote shy.

In the morning we will vote again on Rutherford vs. NOTA. I hope NOTA wins so that that we can re-open nominations and other people have the chance to step up and serve the party. I do believe that the message sent today was strong enough to get Rutherford’s attention though. Personally, if I were him, I would step down and let others enter the running, but I doubt he will do that. It is my hope that the message was loud and clear that he better start listening to what people want and making sure it happens and that because of that he will be a little more libertarian in the way he is running the party.

Today was incredibly exciting and I was glad to be a part of it.

A Quick Response To, “Why I Mock “Attachment Parenting” and the Kids It Produces”

Today Reason Magazine (Who in general I respect) posted an article by Kennedy that I disagree with on many levels, but agree with on one.  Here is the link to the original: http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/29/why-i-mock-attachment-parenting-and-the

First of all, Kennedy, does not have a real grasp on Attachment Parenting or its roots. The term “Attachment Parenting” was coined by Dr. William Sears and he most often defines it at the “7 B’s.” Birth bonding, breastfeeding, babywearing, bedding close to baby, belief in the value of your baby’s cry, beware of baby trainers, and balance. He goes on to say how its an approach to parenting and not strict rules.

This means you can attachment parent without co-sleeping, I have many friends that do. Also it means you can attachment parent with out breastfeeding. This article seems to think that attachment parents a simply defined by co-sleeping (that and being assholes) this is just not true. Period. Besides that, co-sleeping is a wonderful option for many families, and when done following a few simple guidelines has been proven to have lower rates of SIDS than following all the rules for crib sleeping.

Next, what the heck is wrong with feeding your child what you choose!? My child is one of those poor “imaginary invalids.” Last time he drank straight milk he vomited for hours. It was one of the worst days of my life and surly the worst of his. But here’s where somehow I can manage to do the impossible, be an attachment parent (what food allergies have to do with attachment parenting, I have NO IDEA) and a libertarian all at once! I don’t “take the rest of the class or school hostage” I don’t force other groups to eat wheat and dairy free like my son. I let people know his dietary restrictions so they aren’t offended when I take away cheesy potatoes from him (they aren’t the ones who will be up with a gassy toddler all night), but I never ever make or suggest that events he is a part of be entirely made of foods he can eat. That’s crazy. I just BE A PARENT. I watch what he eats, and don’t let him eat the stuff he shouldn’t! WHOA! I know, crazy right?

Next, continuing on the subject of food. I avoid (and also help my family avoid) eating crap. How is taking responsibility for my health and my families heathy by avoiding things like high fructose corn syrup and GMO’s and food that is generally terrible for you a problem? I also see this as incredibly libertarian. One, I’m taking responsibility for myself, not eating myself to death then whining when I’m sick and dying. Two, I’m voting with my dollar. I’m choosing to buy local and organic and healthy, because that’s what I support. Three, I’m costing the tax payers less money by being a healthy able-bodied person who doesn’t need welfare, workmen’s comp, or any government money to help pay for my diabetes supplies!

I understand why someone would be upset if someone was a jerk about their decisions about what to  put in their body. Its not anyone’s job to tell anyone else what to eat. Period. Seeing that the author lives in L.A. I can see why they think this is a huge issue let me just say, the whole country isn’t like that. Pretty much just L.A. Also, being a jerk doesn’t render your entire parenting and political philosophy stupid. Some people are just jerks.

The sharing thing… I 100% agree with that a person has personal and property rights and if a child doesn’t want to share they shouldn’t be forced to. Why this idea is incompatible with attachement parenting (the idea that you should listen and respond to your child’s needs) is beyond me. I have no idea what the issue is here. I attachment parent and enforce this rule everyday. I still teach my son and nephew (or at least try) that its kind and loving to share, and that the older kids should do their best to respect and care for the younger kids. But if one has a toy that is THIER TOY, and another kid tries to take it by force I don’t allow it. That’s generally where I step in in the affairs of young children when one uses force on another. Besides that I back off and let them be kids (another idea that’s totally in line with attachment parenting).

The last issue in the article is a rant about those who want to get rid of awards in sport and for other achievements. I’ve personally never even seen this as an attachement parenting issue, but I can see how it could be. What I say is, be a libertarian and don’t put your child in a program where that is happening if you don’t like it.  Personally I have no problem with awards for sports and things, I teach kids to kick other kids to win gold medals and big trophies. In the world of sports only rarely does this system backfire. As I’m doing more research into education I’m finding that traditional grading is total garbage and means little to nothing anyway, so I say do away with it. But if you don’t like that send your kid to a different school, or better yet, really stick it to the government and be a true libertarian, homeschool.

I do agree with the LAST point made in the blog,

“In the future, when the parenting collective insists on nut free zones, scoreless athletics, and holiday-free childhoods, do the one thing that might run counter to your lone wolf individualism: Start a coalition! Beneath sensible button-ups and shift dresses you might be surprised to find an analytical army of rugged individuals ready to wage war against groupthinking nut haters everywhere.”

This is libertaian, if you have a problem DO SOMETHING. But if doing something means writing an “article” bashing something that you know nothing about maybe you should try something else.

Finally I want to comment on “Free-Range Parenting” as it was discussed at length in the comments of the article. Free Range parenting is not letting your kids run around doing whatever they want. It’s actually one of the most libertarian parenting philosophies ever, its also totally compatible with attachment parenting. I think they  go hand in hand very well. The idea of free range is that your child is a responsible human being who is capable of doing things on their own. They don’t need constant supervision to do something they know how to do and is relatively safe! It’s part letting kids be kids and part reality check. Its realizing there is not a kidnapper around every corner and its actually safe to let your kid explore the neighborhood! Check out the blog, freerangekids.com for tons of info on free-range parenting.

Finally I  want to say, that doing research and taking responsibility as a parent is libertarian no matter how that manifests itself in your parenting style. Most often I’ve found that attachement parents are some of the few parents I meet who are actually educated about children and parenting. If I ask a non-attachment parent a “Why?” about parenting, rarely can they give me an answer they thought up themselves. Most often its “My Dr. told me to.” That’s a cop-out. It is. Doctors aren’t parenting experts, some aren’t even health experts! Doing your own research, thinking for yourself, and being responsible for your decisions (including bringing a child into the world) is libertarian, and that’s what attachment parents are doing.

Sorry I don’t have time to edit this. I have to pack for the Libertarian National Convention, I leave in just over 24 hours. I will be busy attachment parenting and being a libertarian at the national convention. Kennedy, if you go, be sure to find me and say “Hi”.

Babywearing, one of the "7 Bs" of attachment parenting.

Mandatory Spay and Neuter Laws

Mandatory spay and neuter (MSN) laws are all the rage lately and for some reason many in the rescue community are getting behind them. Most of the time animal rescuers are very smart, researching what they do. That’s why thy save animals instead of breed them. They are smart and have hearts for the helpless in our society. Yet, for some reason they, and many others, seems to have skipped their research when it comes to mandatory spay and neuter. They also seem to have forgotten which country we live in.

It is very much a fact that spaying and neutering domestic cats and dogs reduces the pet population. People simply can’t stop nature! Dogs and cats are driven to make more dogs and cats, and when the time is right they will stop at nothing to do so! In fact, leaving your dog in-tact is a good way to lose him, as he will be driven to track down any in heat females he can smell. Dogs that have never gotten out of the yard will scale a 6 foot fence for a good opportunity to make puppies! Spaying and neutering in itself is highly recommend by about pretty much everyone and the benefits go on and on. All 5 of my dogs, including my purebred AKC registered Irish Wolfhound are spayed or neutered, along with my two cats. No puppies here unless they are rescued!

You would think because of this that mandatory spay and neuter laws would greatly reduce pet population then, since spaying and neutering works so well. But its not nearly that simple. First of all, the people who are not spaying and neutering their animals now are in one of three groups. Either they are a responsible breeder, that has good homes lined up for their animals, they are people that are already not following the licensing, vaccination, and anti-cruelty laws already in existence, or they would be open to spaying or neutering but do not have access to a vet or can not afford to get their animals spay or neutered.

In the united states, animal welfare laws are very very rarely enforced. It is a well known fact, even among the rescue community. Most of the time a not for profit group has to come in and do all the leg work while local police or animal control basically come along for the “bust.” Groups like the ASPCA or local humane societies will have to step in if anything is going to get done. The municipalities simply aren’t doing it. Putting another law on the books that won’t get enforced is not going to change a thing. The people with puppy mills will still have puppy mills, the people who just dont care about their dogs still wont care.  In fact even the ASPCA is against mandatory spay and neuter laws,

“The ASPCA is not aware of any credible evidence demonstrating a statistically significant enhancement in the reduction of shelter intake or euthanasia as a result of the implementation of a mandatory spay/neuter law.”

 They go on to say,

“[…] in at least one community that enacted an MSN law, fewer pets were subsequently licensed, likely due to owners’ reluctance to pay either the high fee for keeping an unaltered animal or the fee to have the pet altered (Office of Legislative Oversight, 1997).”

Wait, not only do MSN laws not work, but they actually hurt people and animals? Yep. Thats right. It has actually been shown that mandatory spay and neuter laws actually do damage in some communities. Owners that don’t want to spay or neuter, or can not afford it and don’t want to get caught, will forgo medical care (including vaccinations that help the pet population as a whole) to avoid getting caught or fined. Even veterinarians are against MSN laws because they don’t want people to avoid bringing their animals to the vet for other services. The American Veterinary Medical Association says,

” The AVMA does not support regulations or legislation mandating spay/neuter of privately owned, non-shelter dogs and cats. Although spaying and neutering helps control dog and cat populations, mandatory approaches may contribute to pet owners avoiding licensing, rabies vaccination and veterinary care for their pets, and may have other unintended consequences.”

These are not the only major groups that oppose mandatory spay and neuter laws. In addition to the the ASPCA, and the AVMA; No Kill Houston, the AKC, the NAIA, Best Friends Animal Society, and most large no- kill rescue groups oppose MSN laws.

There has been some good research done specifically into the cat over population problem, and it has been found that most domestic cats are spayed or neutered already. The problem lies with the stray and feral cat populations. MSN laws would actually divert resources away from trap-neuter-release programs that are badly needed. My own cat was a product of a lack TNR resources here in illinois. Not only were there no groups to help ta local women trap her ferals, but no groups were willing to take the cats either. So I came and helped with my own time and money taking four kittens. Ally Cat Allies has a fantastic document outlining all the issues with MSN and feral cat populations,

“MSN targets owners of pet cats in an effort to increase the spay/neuter rate—a pointless target given that 82% of pet cats are already neutered.”

In addition to medical care being withheld from animals and diverting resources away from TNR programs, mandatory spay and neuter laws also keep time and funds away from other places they could be better used. Such as, providing education on why it is important to spay and neuter (which has been shown to increase the amount of pets that are spayed/neutered)  and enforcing the laws that already exist. If we tracked down those breeding with out a license or those who are running puppy mills and shut them down there would be less impulse puppies available and eventually less given up to shelters (this is another issue for another day).

Mandatory Spay and Neuter laws are also unconstitutional. At this time in most of the United States animals are considered property (though that is changing in some places) and as long as I’m not hurting anyone I should be allowed to do what I want with my property. Property rights are incredibly important and almost always take precedent over any other issue at hand. Personally, this alone is a good enough reason not to have MSN laws, but I did the research on all the reasons anyway just to show the point that MSN laws don’t work!

Education always works better than legislation and this is just another example of that. If we want less pets, we need to provide people with low/no cost spay and neuter programs and educate them on the importance of spaying and neutering.

Here are the pages quoted and some other good MSN resources:

http://www.naiaonline.org/about/policy_mandatory_spay_neuter.htm

http://www.alleycat.org/document.doc?id=240

http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/animal_welfare/population_control.asp

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/mandatory-spay-neuter-laws.aspx

http://www.theamericandogmag.com/politics/effects-of-mandatory-spay-neuter-laws

Please spay and neuter your pets!