Hair: The Long and Shaggy of it

I said it was coming, and after a long and arduous scouring of the archives, I've gathered enough evidence upon which you can base your votes.  Above is Jimmy's current hair style.  It's driving me nuts, mostly because it's not really a style at all, but rather hair that has been left un-cut for several months.  Hair which he vows he will not cut until the bébé is born.  That's another five weeks, people!  And TBH, I don't think he will cut it after the bundle arrives.  Why?  Because I am his hairdresser, and I only know two styles: buzz cut and buzz cut with a mohawk stripe, both of which he loves, of course.  But he is adamant that long hair is where it's at right now.  I don't do long hair, and he won't go to a proper hair dresser, which is why I have concluded that mop is going to be around for much longer than five weeks.
Especially since he discovered yesterday that if he combs it a certain way it's starting to look like his favourite movie villain of all time.

Why anyone would aspire to look like this, I don't know.  I told Jimmy it was the worst hair ever, and he said "No it's not!", only to be proven wrong by a quick Google search for worst movie hair of all time.

If it's long hair he wants, and Javier his muse, why not go for this?

Or this?

Clearly I need help in convincing my mule of a husband that his hair is in need of attention, so browse below and leave your votes via comment box. I'm desperate, and he may listen to his public before he will listen to me!

First up the short cuts, all of which are my handiwork.  I missed my calling, I know. 

Look 1: Buzz Cut

Look 2: Buzz cut with mohawk stripe

Mohawk stripes again!

Now to the medium length looks.  These were done by an actual professional.

He actually asked for a mullet.  I kid you not.

Length that is tamed.  Not so for the BBQ sauce.

Wedding day spikes.

Another mullet-like look, albeit better than the first one.

I think one of Jimmy's biggest problems with his hair is that it is very thick and must be cut often to maintain a style. A s you might have guessed, he's not one to keep a regular six week appointment at the salon.  Evidence of the shaggy grow out:

It starts to look wild fast!

You've seen him during his hair farmer days before, but here it is again, a painful reminder:

So please, make your opinion known and save us from an unpleasant repetition of the past.  If not for my sake, then for the sake of the peanut who will have to look at that hair-do in their baby book photos for the rest of his or her life!

Shelby

When I am Queen . . .

With William away for six weeks, Catherine is keeping busy with charity events and looking fabulous.  Just yesterday she was out working with children on their art projects in this lovely number:

With her husband away, I'm sure the Duchess also has some time to think about what things will be like when she is Queen.  I can imagine her being a thoughtful and judicious ruler.  Not so when I become Queen of Alberta.  My subjects will need boundaries, and I am only too happy to provide them.  My first decree will deal with the kitchen.  Specifically, the sink.  The stopper must be properly placed to catch the little bits of food from your dinner.  Those who insist on placing the stopper in the sink upside down will be deported to Saskatchewan.

Correct placement.  Food caught and cradled to be safely
transported to the garbage.

Incorrect placement.  Food bits caught, for the time being,
 only to be flung everywhere when stopper is removed.

When I am Queen, Alberta will become a province where form and function reign supreme.  This will of course mean that my husband will be packing his bags, but I am willing to make that sacrifice for my people.  That is all.

Actually, one more thing.  I'm not Queen yet, but in my quest to climb the social ladder I have become a contributor for Urban Infant Magazine's new website!  You can read my bio here.  I'll let you know when my first article is posted.  If you have any ideas on what I could write about, I'd love to hear it.  See, I too can be thoughtful and judicious.
Shelby

Ultrasound as Discriminatory Tool?

While browsing the Globe and Mail online the other day (just after I finished watching The Bachelor - I have varied tastes) I came across a very interesting article discussing the use of ultrasound technology to identify whether a fetus is male or female, and the subsequent abortion of female fetuses in some ethnic groups.  The editor in chief of the Canadian Medical Association Journal called this practice "discrimination against women in its most extreme form", and I would have to agree.  The editor (and medical doctor) proposes certain measures that could help prevent this "evil" that "devalues women" including the delay of revealing fetal gender until 30 weeks of gestation, and educational programs that would combat the sexist thinking and practices that lead to female feticide.  While this doctor's point of view has been called controversial, it's not the most interesting or controversial part of this particular article.  


The author takes this idea further to question the practice of feticide based on ultrasound identifiable "anomalies" such as cleft palate, missing limbs, spina bifida, and Down syndrome.  While many would agree with the doctor's summation above, citing female feticide as discrimination in an extreme form, these same people may be hard pressed to call abortion of a disabled fetus discrimination against the disabled in its most extreme form.  Thus the provocative title of this article "Why Care Less About the Disabled Fetus?"


I would have called myself pro-choice before reading this article, and I think I still would, but this article raises a very uncomfortable grey area, for me at least.  Are there situations in which choice should be limited, such as in the case of gender selection or anomaly identification?  Who would decide the situations in which choice should be limited?  And just because I know what I would do when faced with an unsettling ultrasound finding, can I judge those who would choose differently?  When it comes down to it, I know the answer to that last question is no. While it feels good to know what the right choice for me is, the reasoning behind calling myself pro-choice is that I can't put myself in someone else's shoes and decide what is best for them, nor can I understand the feelings they will go through after having made a decision for themselves.  


It's a good thing to examine and question our beliefs, even if you end up making the same conclusion come the end of that examination, but the article remains eye opening.  It is very compelling to think that while many people (even those who consider themselves pro-choice) would agree that female feticide is a form of discrimination, when it comes to abortion of a disabled fetus people see it as a more socially acceptable choice for expectant parents to consider.  As the article asks, why do we (seem) to care less about the disabled fetus?


A regular feature titled "Thought Provoking Thursday" perhaps?  Or just more videos of David Beckham in his underwear?  I think I'll continue to stick to the grey area and go for a compromise.  Life is about balance, right?!?
Shelby

Hair: The Long and Short of it

I have had both very long hair and very short hair, and everything in between.  And while I usually lean towards the shorter side of the spectrum, it doesn't seem like many others in my life feel the same way.  

As a teacher, returning to school the day after having your hair cut can be intense. True, there are those students who don't notice, but more often than not there are many comments, often when you're trying to lecture, or administer a test or at a zillion other inopportune times that the munchables will make their feelings known.

I can remember one student who said, upon seeing my freshly coiffed locks, "Don't worry, Mrs. Quinlan. It will grow back."  Or another who waited until several months later when the hair had in fact grown back, then said, "Remember that time you had a bowl cut?  I'm glad you grew it out."  And inevitably, the girls in my class would swoon over the wedding photo on my desk, and say things like: "Oh, you had such long hair!  You were so pretty then.  Why did you cut it all off?"  From the mouths of babes . . . ?  Even my brother in law joined in with his very forward thinking perspective when I cut my hair shortly after my wedding saying, "Well, you're married, you've cut off your hair, now all you need to do is gain 15 pounds to complete the trifecta."  Ahem.  

But here's the thing.  My hair is not particularly thick, and so when it's long, it has a tendency to look like someone attached seven strands of golden yarn to my head.  Yes, long hair is more versatile, but also more work.  Short hair seems edgier and more stylish, but you have to cut it constantly to keep it's shape, and sometimes it can cross into soccer mom territory. Currently my hair is in a mid length bob, because I didn't want to have a pixie cut paired with a potentially bloated pregnant face, but I'm sure after the bébé arrives the temptation to reach for the scissors will arrive with a vengeance.  My only fear is that I won't be able to make a sound decision with the monumental hormone shifts and lack of sleep that are  awaiting me.  What to do?  Turn to the internet for advice!  What do you think?  Long or short?  

 While I await your shrewd advice, I'm off to research some ideas for future posts. Talking about myself constantly has become dreary.

Ta!

Shelby 

Parents in a Dangerous Time

There's been much made of the cynical view taken of parenthood as portrayed in the media today.  Think Modern Family or the bestselling book, Go the F**k to Sleep (careful, this link contains adult content), not to mention the innumerable blogs dedicated to the gruelling task of rearing the leaders of tomorrow.  But are contemporary depictions of parenting gratuitously negative or simply more realistic than those of the Leave it to Beaver era?
I break out in a sweat just thinking about the tribulations caused by grandma's brood that she would have had to gloss over when all of the other neighbourhood moms came for coffee.  Little Lonnie quit kindergarten?  No, he just wasn't ready this year.  Donnie wrecked his sister's car, again?  The roads were icy (It's May, grandma).  Bonnie got pregnant out of wed-lock?  No, the baby was just premature.
It seems like there was so much pressure to keep up with the Joneses that any imperfections, big or small, had to be kept under lock and key.  Did my grandma have even one close friend she could confide in or seek advice from?  I hope so, but I'm not so sure.  And I bet you even if I tried to ask her today, she'd still say "What would I have needed to confide?  It was never that bad."  This kind of hear no, see no, speak no evil attitude is definitely a foreign concept in a world where one's every thought or action can be broadcast to the world through any number of social networking sites at a moment's notice.  Not to  mention that these thoughts and actions will be judged and commented upon just as quickly as they are posted.  
So which is better?  A world in which the trials and tribulations of life as a parent are never discussed, or a world in which nothing is off limits?  I guess the answer to this question should really be looked at in terms of what will make parents better able to raise their children.  Can a parent who suffers in silence be as effective as a parent who is open about their problems?  
In my opinion (which must be good, because you came here to read it) the parent who openly discusses their problems will only be more effective than the parent who is tight lipped if they are entering into the discussion with two purposes:
The first purpose being just to get it off of their chest, which can keep a person sane enough to do it all again tomorrow.  
The second purpose being to seek support and find alternative solutions for the problems they are facing.  
The trouble with this in today's Facebook world?  When someone posts a parenting issue in their status, most of the "advice" that Facebook friends offer isn't all that helpful, and sometimes doesn't even make sense.  I had a friend who posted a status about a difference of opinion she and her partner were having when it came to their one year old, and more than one commenter suggested she just leave him. How is that helpful?  It's a pretty hefty piece of advice to give, considering all that the commenter knows about the situation is wrapped up in two sentences or less. But everyone's an expert these days (me too, that's why I'm blathering on and on about this).
One thing's for sure though, the examples in the media today make it easier to feel like we're all in the same boat and definitely allow us to take ourselves less seriously.  The post that got me thinking about all of this in the first place is a perfect example.  Writer Drew Magary recently attended a class called "Why don't my Kids Listen to Me?" in an attempt to learn "how not to be a terrible father", and these are a sampling of the nine things he learned while in attendance:

Number One: Never repeat yourself.
The second you repeat yourself, you're dead. The kid will just be like, "Hey, I can just sit here and dad will say the same shit over and over again. COOL." Kids think this way because they're evil. Say it once. If the kids don't act, take them by the hand and guide them to their task. 

Number Four: Accept that your children are going to do annoying shit.
We were told there was a list out there that detailed typical behaviors for children based upon their age. Two-year-olds will throw things. Five-year-olds will break things. There are certain annoying facets of children that are simply the cost of doing business, and accepting that makes it a little bit easier to tolerate it when your kid is spitting in your goddamn ear.

Number Seven: Never get locked into a power struggle.
If you say to your kid, "Hey, eat your dinner," and the kid is like , "No," and you're like, "You're grounded if you don't," and the kid still says no, you've basically signed yourself up for a full night of SUCK. Because now you're in a power struggle with a kid, and you won't want to lose because you won't want them thinking you're a pussy, and they won't want to lose because, hey, what's an hour wasted to them? NOTHING. Kids were born to waste time. They have nothing better to do. May as well ruin your life while they're waiting to become drinking age. If the kid doesn't eat dinner, the kid doesn't eat.
The full post is worth a read, and definitely gave me some food for thought.  For now though, I'm just an ignorant parent-to-be pretending to know what I'm talking about on the inter-web.  And the nice thing is that I'm definitely not alone!  I'd love to hear what you think . . . comment away.