Daily Dose of Common Sense

Is your child dressing up as a witch this year? What about a gypsy? Or, perhaps as Darth Maul from Star Wars? Well, some schools and communities might take issue with these costumes. Around the country, there is a growing movement to eliminate “scary” or “inappropriate” costumes.

Guns, daggers and other toy weapons have long been excised from costumes at many school celebrations on Halloween. But in some classrooms across the country, the interpretation of what is too scary–or offensive, gross or saddening–is now also leading to an abundance of caution and some prohibitions.

First, you have to wonder what the motivation is here. Halloween began as a Celtic tradition where, “their purpose was to disguise oneself as a harmful spirit and thus avoid harm.” So, traditional costumes began as monsters, vampires, witches, devils, or skeletons. Does the desire to eliminate any “scary” costume come from a Christian religious contingent, whereby some devoutly religious believe that Halloween is a satanic holiday?

Second, can’t we just let kids wear what they want?

Restricting toy weapons makes some sense, as it is a safety issue. However, who is responsible for determining which costumes are too scary, offensive, gross, or sad? When someone starts making those kinds of judgements, next thing you know the only costume allowed will be a fruit or vegetable. “Ohhhh, that turnip is so scary!” Will a beet be acceptable, or does the red color make it offensive?

(Is this just a ploy by the Veggie Tale people, whose “mission is to enhance the spiritual and moral fabric of society through creative media.” Back off, religious broccoli!)

Parents and some educators said that restrictions like those at Riverside Drive often stemmed from a desire to protect smaller children from freakishly scary costumes, to maintain classroom order (spray-on hair color is often banned, for instance, because children tend to spray it all day long) and to keep from demeaning groups through costumes that play on stereotypes.

Parents should be able to use discretion when it comes to their child’s costume. Do I believe Freddy Krueger is an appropriate costume for a little kid? No. But, I wouldn’t call the Halloween police on the kid, either.

How is that sexy costumes for girls are becoming more prevalent and “scary” costumes are getting a bum rap?

Photo

As Halloween approaches, it’s time for some old urban legends to be dusted off and circulated. First stop: Bobtown, Pennsylvania where the kids won’t be allowed to go door-to-door looking for treats. The scrooges in the small community have cancelled trick or treating. Community leaders say the radical step is being taken to keep kids “safe.” Safe from what, exactly? We’re not sure.

With a party at the fire hall, he says both the kids and the candy they receive would be safe.

Huh?

As Lenore Skenazy pointed out in her book “Free-Range Kids”:

Was there ever really a rash of candy killings? Joel Best, a professor of sociology and criminal justice at the University of Delaware, took it upon himself to find out. He studied crime reports from Halloween dating back as far as 1958, and guess exactly how many kids he found poisoned by a stranger’s candy?

A hundred and five? A dozen? Well, one, at least?

“The bottom line is that I cannot find any evidence that any child has ever been killed or seriously hurt by a contaminated treat picked up in the course of trick-or-treating,” says the professor. The fear is completely unfounded.

Give kids their costumes and candy. They are in more danger of being hit by a car than poisoned treats. So, keep them safe by following some simple common sense rules, like:

• Always accompany young children and, if they’re too old to have an uncool parent tag along, be certain they travel in groups that are as large as practical. Be certain they know not to accept rides from, or go inside the homes of, strangers.
• Get your kids to agree to a move along a pre-planned route and stay in the neighborhood. It’s best to know generally where they are and to set a time at which they must return home to prevent unnecessary risk or worry.
• Be sure the costumes have reflective surfaces and have your kids carry flashlights and glo-sticks. Caution the trick-or-treaters to stick to the sidewalks and be very aware of moving vehicles and only cross at designated crossing areas and traffic lights. Spirits may be running high (in more ways than one), and nighttime driving can also affect the vision of the soberest driver.

The most you have to worry about from Halloween candy is a high dentist bill.

Photo courtesy of Flickr: YAXZONE

British Airways may just be starting the next trend in airline fees. In another effort to nickel-and-dime customers to death, BA will now charge passengers an additional fee for choosing their seats ahead of time. So, if you’re traveling with your kids, securing their seats with yours is going to cost extra.

This will also affect anyone who prefers an aisle or window seat. Locking those down before you fly will cost extra on BA.

A BA spokeswoman said: “Customers frequently request specific seats, but in the past we’ve only been able to confirm them 24 hours in advance or on the day.

“We know people want to secure them in advance and have real control over their flying experience. This will allow them to do that.”

Why not just be truthful? Instead, say something like, “Our airline was 400 million pounds in the red last year. We need money and therefore we pledge to find ways to get more of it from our passengers.”

[Via BoingBoing]

Photo courtesy of Flickr: Simon_sees

At the mall one morning recently, I overheard two parents talking. As our small kids were all riding kiddie rides, one mother told the other that her son was sick that day and he wouldn’t be in pre-school that afternoon. She wanted to keep him out of school to “you know, be considerate.”

How about keeping your kid home from the mall, too? If your son or daughter is too sick to go to school, does it really make sense to let them spread germs at the mall? When my kids are too sick for school, that means no galavanting around town, either. Kids are everywhere, and sick kids can spread germs as easily at the mall as they can at school.

What’s wrong with some parents?

Photo courtesy of Flickr: Mykl Roventine

I’m a big fan of TV. We recently got Verizon’s FiOS, which has a crazy amount of channels to choose from. So far, I love it. But, as I’m flipping through the guide, some completely ridiculous shows just jump out at me and beg to be commented on. So, here is our first installation of “shows lacking in any common sense whatsoever.”

Boooo!
It’s a ghost! No, wait–it’s just Medium and Ghost Whisperer. These two shows, which are shown back-to-back in what must the network must have dreamt up as “the crazy-chick block,” are based on the premise that ghosts are real. But, they’re not. No evidence of the paranormal has ever been proven. Sooooooooo…..??

That’s why shows like Psych and The Mentalist are so great. They present paranormal abilities as shams, and stress the use of careful observations to solve crimes.

TLC: W.T.F.?
TLC, originally started as THE LEARNING CHANNEL, has totally gone off the rails. Forget that they give Jon & Kate as well as the circus sideshow with 18 kids a platform. That’s bad. But, it’s shows like I Didn’t Know I Was Pregnant, Your Kid Ate What? and Toddlers and Tiaras that really depress me. Is this really the best TLC can do?

While I haven’t watched these three shows, I’m pretty sure the titles tell me all I need to know. I Didn’t Know I Was Pregnant. I find that hard to believe and feel very sorry for you and your kid. Your Kid Ate What? Let me guess. Was it really horrible, potentially dangerous, and embarrassing for you, the kid’s parent? So, you’re sharing that memory with the world because….?

Toddlers and Tiaras is just plain wrong. I don’t want to know about a fringe group that dresses up little girls in pageant gowns and Tammy Faye Baker makeup. Please, please, let me live in that ignorance bubble a little while longer. Oh, I can’t? Thanks a LOT, TLC.

Who watches this crap? I’m no TV snob, and will watch (according to my husband) just about anything. But I do draw the line at shows like these.

Tell me what you think. What shows do you think show a lack of sense?

Photo courtesy of Flickr: angelrravelor

In the recession, one suggestion I’ve heard over and over again has been to borrow books and DVDs from local libraries instead of purchasing them. Makes sense, right? Well, if you live in Philadelphia, you may not have the option any longer. All of the libraries in Philly will close on October 2nd if the state Legislature does not act on the budget request.

Yep, a legislative deadlock is to blame. The city has requested a temporary sales-tax hike and a two-year deferral of pension payments in order to generate funding. If this doesn’t happen, the Philly libraries will all shut down at the beginning of next month. Hard to believe, but it appears to be true.

It is so important to support local libraries. Libraries aren’t just for kids. Many adults need libraries, too. In addition to access to books, movies, and other media, libraries provide computer access to many people who otherwise would not have the option. They host great programs and serve as a resource for the community. To give you an idea of what the closings would mean, just read this excerpt from the notice posted by the library:

All branch and regional library programs, including programs for children and teens, after school programs, computer classes, and programs for adults, will be cancelled.

All Parkway Central Library programs, including children programs, programs to support small businesses and job seekers, computer classes and after school programs, will be cancelled. We are exploring the possibility of relocating the Philadelphia Author Series programs to other non-library facilities.

All library visits to schools, day care centers, senior centers and other community centers will cease.

All community meetings at our branch and regional libraries, and the Parkway Central Library, will be cancelled.

All GED, ABE and ESL programs held at Free Library branches will be discontinued, students should contact their teacher to see if other arrangements are being made.

If you live in the area, here is how you can help.

So, get it together, Philly legislators. Do your jobs and keep the libraries open.

Summer is officially over. With some stores putting up their Christmas decorations in August, it seems as if summer is getting the bum’s rush. Besides getting shorter, summer is changing before our eyes. There are some traditional summertime staples that are fighting for survival.

The Clothesline

Remember your grandmother hanging her wet laundry outside to dry? The practice started to go out of fashion a few decades ago. But in the recession, you might consider hanging your clothes outside instead of running your dryer. Not so fast, say many towns and cities who consider clotheslines an eyesore. The opponents worry about the reduction in property values if everyone starts putting their skivvies outside. So, across the country, folks are fighting for the right to air their dirty laundry.

And, who can blame them? Summertime electric bills are no laughing matter. So, in not running the dryer, a reduction in power use would add up over time:

More than 5% of electricity used in homes goes to power clothes dryers, according to a U.S. Department of Energy report that looked at energy use in 2001.

Besides, have you smelled clothes that have been drying in the sun on a clothesline? There’s a reason why fabric softeners and laundry detergents try to bottle that fragrance.

Ease up, community powers-that-be. A few clotheslines here and there does not mean the neighborhood is becoming a tenement.

The Ice Cream Man

The sing-song jingle of the ice cream man is a memory we all share from childhood. You heard it and you ran like hellfire to find the truck. Well, the ice cream man is taking a beating these days. First, parents complained about the song the trucks play. It was too loud, was played when the truck was stopped, or played after dark. Now, many parents are railing against the continued presence of the ice cream vendors, especially if it happens to be nearby some kids. (I hate to point out the obvious, but isn’t that the target audience?)

The bottom line is that some parents want those sweet treats as far away from their kids as possible. (Apparently, the word “no” is hard to say to some kids.) And, in the times of rampant childhood obesity, people are listening. However, “according to Mister Softee, its typical small vanilla cone is 170 to 190 calories.” A lot of other snacks are much worse for kids than that.

We understand your kids drive you crazy when the truck shows up. But, the ice cream man only shows up a few months out of the year. Don’t ruin it for the rest of us who want the occasional frozen treat.

Reruns

The lazy days of summer aren’t that, well, lazy anymore. TV is no exception. It used to be that you could catch up on all the shows you missed during the year. Forget to see a few episodes of The Love Boat? This was no problem because you could see them (usually starring Charo) again and again over the course of the summer.

Reality TV mostly dominates the summer line up now. So, instead of reliving my favorite 30 Rock episodes, I had to run screaming from More to Love. Or, when I might have had a chance to check out struggling shows like, “Dollhouse” or “Parks & Recreation,” I had to take a shower after seeing the ads for “I’m a Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here.” Yes, I have a DVR. But, it’s nice to flip around and catch an old episode of “The Office” or “Ugly Betty”. Catching up is all too rare in the new summer “reality” of TV.

Some scripted shows, like Mad Men, come back during the summer, too. So, while summertime used to be a time to forget about TV for a while, you really can’t anymore.

Photos courtesy of Flickr: Cyron, duluoz cats

As summer comes to a close, parents can breathe a sigh of relief that long days at the park are over. As I reflect on these past few months, I have to wonder about some of the things I observed about other kids while at the playground. Some are mildly annoying, but some are downright infuriating.

1. Unsupervised Kids
Yes, I saw plenty of parents and nannies turn small kids loose at the playground. One afternoon, I saw three kids hurt themselves in various ways on the play equipment. The caregiver would then appear from out of nowhere and tell the child it was time to go home. How about paying attention to the kid before he/she gets hurt? Making the child leave after an injury only punishes he/she for something that is the caregiver’s fault: not paying attention.

2. Too Old for the Park
What, exactly, are tweens and teenagers doing at a playground for small children? While I applaud their attempt to get exercise, it’s just not safe for the smaller kids. The bigger kids run around and push past the toddlers, and I’ve seen plenty of teens do dangerous things on the play equipment. Isn’t there a soccer field or basketball court you kids should be on instead?

3. Up is Down, and Down is Up
It really drives me crazy when caregivers let kids go up slides the wrong way. Yes, it’s fun to climb. But, when your kid is climbing up the slide, other kids can’t slide down. More important than the kids who are waiting, every time a kid climbs up the wrong way, he/she risks an injury. I saw plenty of collisions where a kid was going up and another kid was sliding down. And, this happened with supervised kids, too. Come on, parents.

4. Swing Hogs
Usually a playground only has a few swings and they are in hot demand. Lines form with anxious kids who try to wait patiently for their turn. However, some parents act oblivious to the line and let their kid swing as long as he/she wants. Move it, swing hogs! Let everyone have a turn.

5. Inappropriate Park Toys
I actually saw a toddler with a baseball bat at the park this summer. Kid swinging a bat + other little kids = BAD IDEA! But, also in this category is any toy that your kid doesn’t want to share, lose, or damage. If it’s a family heirloom, it has no business at the park.

I probably sound like a curmudgeon. But, I’m not. I think everyone should be respectful of the all the kids and parents at the park. For most parents, not doing the above is common sense. For others, however, please read and learn. You’re ruining the park for the rest of us. So, let’s do better next summer.

Photo courtesy of Flickr: foundphotoslj

With childhood obesity rates climbing, many people are looking for ways to turn the tide. One report out this week strongly suggests that junk food and sugary sodas should be taxed by state and local governments. According to the article, tobacco taxes have been shown to be effective in reducing tobacco use. So, they argue, taxes on soft drinks and fattening foods could do the same for the obesity rates in this country.

No one can deny that childhood obesity–and adult obesity–are problems. From the article:

“The prevalence of childhood obesity has tripled in just three decades,” the report reads. Nearly 18 percent of U.S. adolescents are obese.

While the food and restaurant industry cites personal choice and a lack of exercise, many reports have shown that unhealthy food is cheaper, more readily available and more heavily marketed than more healthful foods.

This is definitely cause for concern. But, are taxes really the answer?

First, who determines what “junk” food qualifies for the tax? This could be a very fine line. Soft drinks…chocolate…fast food…popsicles…flavored yogurt? Where does the list end? Plus, it would be very hard to get a fair assessment of all the foods that contribute to weight gain. You can bet that some special interest group would use every trick in the book to keep their products tax-free. For example, the soft drink lobby has not responded favorably to finger-pointing thus far:

Last week, the American Heart Association took on the $115 billion soft drink industry, saying the drinks are the No. 1 source of added sugars in the American diet.

The American Beverage Association, representing companies including PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Co and Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc, says sugar-sweetened drinks do not pose a particular health risk.

Second, the tax would mostly hit the people who can’t afford it. According to an article in Time Magazine, childhood obesity “discriminates by income: 22.4% of 10-to-17-year-olds living below the poverty line–less than $21,200 for a family of four–are overweight or obese, compared with 9.1% of kids whose families earn at least four times that amount.” So, the tax wouldn’t teach the lower-income families how to eat better; it would only have them pay more for what they currently know how to do.

How about more education for the lower-income families on how to buy fresh and healthy food more economically? For example, apples, bananas, and cheese aren’t expensive, and these are great snacks for kids. Grocery store chains could offer classes on purchasing healthy food for kids. Or, what about cost incentives in low-income neighborhoods to customers who purchase fresh fruits and vegetables?

Schools are starting to do their parts to educate kids about nutrition and take away access to all the sugary soda and candy. Healthier lunch options are also being made available. Will it be enough? Probably not, if the parents aren’t on board as well.

It seems as if no one wants to address the real issue, which is knowledge and access. Throwing money at obesity, even in the form of higher taxes, isn’t the answer.

Photo courtesy of Flickr: D Sharon Pruitt

A study just released claims that one in ten teenagers has posted a nude or seminude photo of themselves online. This incredibly high number should cause some head scratching. Like a hasty tattoo, these photos could be hard to later remove and therefore haunt these teens for years.

I have a friend who says that everyone should get nude pictures of themselves taken when they are eighteen years old. He says you’ll never, ever look better so document it while you can. Well, I didn’t and now that I’m sliding down towards forty, I have to say I agree with his logic. So, I certainly can’t begrudge teens for taking racy pictures of themselves. But, posting them online? We all know how iron-clad the online privacy is these days. Do these kids care nothing at all for who sees their photos?

I guess the teens uploading these types of photos aren’t planning careers in politics or anything with a morals clause. Nike might not be thrilled with seeing its star player’s bait and tackle all over the Internet, even if they were old pictures. Before she started scene-stealing on Ugly Betty, Vanessa Williams got in a little bit of trouble due to some nude photos, as have many other actresses. I guess if you’re going into porn, building a fan base with some nude photos might be a smart move. But, I doubt very many teens are thinking about future careers or potential employers. So, what about parents, teachers, classmates, neighbors, or other family members? Not everyone would want Mrs. Mitchell or Uncle Bob to see their racy photos on the Web.

Someone needs to remind kids about long-term ramifications and the Internet. Remember the Facebook privacy bruhaha from earlier in the year? The social network giant caught all kinds of flack after saying they own your content–even after you deactivate your account. Nothing ever goes away, folks. Not even when you delete it.

[Via PatsPapers.com]

Photo courtesy of Flickr: visualdensity