Motherhood Crack

Before you have kids, you inevitably hear about what it's like.  In my case, I heard a lot of negatives.  Sometimes it was a bit hard to grasp why people kept having kids.  I didn't really understand the positives.  I assumed they were there, and I assumed they were big, and I assumed (more like hoped) that someday I would understand.

So then I had Jane, and we were sitting in the hospital room and she was three hours old and Michael and I were just looking at her like - You are the coolest person ever.  And I wanted to do it all over again, right there, and have a million more, and right then I couldn't understand the negatives.  There were negatives?

They inevitably came.  Days when I was really tired and was unsure how to keep chugging.  There are tough things about being a mommy.  But I thought it would be long periods of the negatives... like long periods of depression and fatigue and feeling like crap.  Instead, what it turned out to be was more like being bipolar.  I called it Motherhood Bipolarism.  Because I could be crying from fatigue or whatever, and then 20 minutes later I'd be holding Jane and be like, "Ohmigod, I'm so happee!"

Months passed.  Jane started walking, started having little emotions, started to toddle around the house.  And she would fall down and bump her toe or her knee or her head, and she would lift herself up and come running into my arms and would cuddle her little head into my neck and stop crying and that's when it hit me: the Motherhood Crack.

Because it's so much more than just a bipolar disorder now, it's a full-fledged heroin addiction.  When it's good, it's Soooo, Soooo, sooooo good.  Jane throws her little arms around my neck and snuggles into me and my whole body floods with endorphins or something like them.  I wonder sometimes - maybe I shouldn't coddle her?  But then I'm like "what the heck" and I just let her snuggle and cuddle and then she smiles at me and oh my gosh! it is so good.

I'm shaking just thinking about it.  But then, you have the inevitable lows.  You're tired and the baby is fussy and won't eat her food and instead just throws it on the floor, and you're starting to go through withdrawals, feeling lethargic, wondering where you can get your next fix, feeling frustrated and irritable and generally mad.  Why did I sign up for this again?  How long do I have to do this again?

And then your baby gives you a kiss for the first time.  A real, puckered-lip, kiss.  And then she smiles and laughs.  And you think, "Ohmigod, I'm so happeeeeee.  Everyone should be doing this, why aren't more people doing this?"  Or maybe it's not a kiss.  Maybe it's watching her dance for the first time, picking up her little feet and then throwing out her arms and spinning with a big smile.  Maybe it's seeing her reach out her little hand and touch your face for the first time.  Maybe it's the first time she calls you "Mama."  Maybe it is all of those and more, all the firsts and every time after and each one is like an injection of pure joy.

So there it is: for me, being a mommy is like being addicted to Motherhood Crack.  The highest highs you've ever felt, with occasional crying.  I'm a total addict.  

That's how it is for me, but I'm not sure this is a general rule.  I know some people who didn't feel happy for the first few months of being a parent, or who felt good at first but then had pretty bad depression several months after becoming a parent.  If you have kids, what was it like for you?  Is it still that way or has it changed?

The end is coming

At the moment it is 84 degrees, but it won't be so next Thursday!  Goodbye, Summer.

What do I think about polygamy?

Wow, I know.  I bet you weren't expecting a serious discussion from me today.  But I've got a few things that I have been thinking about a lot and I want to put them down so that I can move on.

Recently a friend and I were discussing polygamy, specifically with interest to the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or the Mormons, of which we are both members.  Historically, members of the church practiced polygamy from the 1840's to the turn of the century when the church decided to discontinue plural marriages (resisted by a few members and even some groups which splintered off).

But, it's there, in our history.  And a few echoes of that past are still present with us today.  It's mentioned in our scripture (Doctrine and Covenants, 131, 132, I'm looking at you).  Also, if a man and woman are married in the temple, and his wife dies, that man can marry another woman in the temple later on.  But if a man and woman are married in the temple and her husband dies, that woman cannot remarry in the temple unless she secures a "temple divorce" from her first husband.

These things, and the church's history of polygamy which was heartily supported by original church founders who we hold in very high esteem, lead many members today to try to understand divine purpose in polygamy.  Many times I have heard the explanation that in the early days of the church, many men were either being killed or dying (especially on the pioneer trek west), and in order to protect and provide for their widows, men needed to take on these extra wives and children.  That is the most rational explanation I have heard.  I'm sure there are others and please put them in the comments.

Anyway, in my conversation with my good friend, she was wondering if maybe polygamy takes a bad rap.  She frankly admitted that she wouldn't mind having help from additional women in the home in tasks such as child-rearing and cleaning.  She mentioned tribes in Africa where polygamy is openly practiced and how there isn't any psychological damage to those women because it is a culturally accepted normality that you share your husband with other women.  Also there are plenty examples from the bible of advantageous marriages between one husband and several wives, where the "work of the Lord" and "multiplying and replenishing the earth" was being accomplished by such a situation.  Please note, my good friend wasn't telling me she wanted to practice polygamy, but rather just exploring what the positives of it could be.

So at one point she asked me, "What do you think about polygamy?"

My answer to her is what I wanted to put here, to share with you.  It's something that I had already been thinking about, and it takes the form of two main points and a third thought:

Point #1: You need one man and one woman to make a baby.
Not one man and two women, three women, etc.  Physically, biologically, it just takes one man and one woman to reproduce.  That's just basic, simple, scientific fact.  This does bring up some questions about whether reproduction is the point of marriage or not (you may or may not agree) but within our church it is believed to be one of the most important things that a married couple can do: to bring new life into the world and "multiply and replenish the earth."  Biologically, you don't need multiple partners to do that.  If we're looking at this strictly logically, all of nature bears witness to the fact that there is no relationship on earth, no animal or living thing that needs anything more than one boy part and one girl part to create new life.  The earth was created this way.

Point #2: In all nations, countries, and lands of the earth, there are about 50% boys and 50% girls being born, everywhere.  Sure, the ratio flexes a bit, but only one or two percentage points in either direction.  It's called "sex ratio." Following this link will take you to the wikipedia article about it, but basically it is the ratio of males to females in a population, and it shows that we are almost completely equal, and there are actually just a few more boys than girls in the world's population!  For every 100 girls out there, there are about 105 boys (referred to as "a ratio of 105").  This article will show you the sex ratio for every country in the world, which almost all hover around 1 boy for every 1 girl, except in a few countries where the ratio is skewed (In Kuwait the ratio is 1.54 while Latvia is at .86).  Skewing usually occurs in countries where mortality rates differ due to things like war casualties and deliberate gender control (as explained in this article on gender imbalance in the human sex ratio).  But even if you even out all of those countries with the entire world population, you still get an almost perfect 1 to 1 ratio.

What this tells me is that there isn't a natural, logical need for men to take on multiple partners.  There's no reason, even in polygamist societies today.  Babies are still being born about 50/50, and I have heard about many boys being turned out from polygamist societies as teenagers, although I don't have any sources to back me up.  I've only heard about it via word of mouth, so if anyone has a known source on that feel free to put it in the comments.

For both of the points I've made, I'm strictly using logic.  Just what basic human reason and some simple math tell me.  I can hear arguments in my mind saying, "Well, you're being strictly logical and scientific, but the Lord's ways don't always make logical sense to man."  That's very true, except when they do.

An important and defining belief of Mormons is that we have both a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother.  Church member Eliza R. Snow wrote a poem in 1845 titled "Invocation, or the Eternal Father and Mother" which includes these lines: "In the heav'ns are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare! Truth is reason; truth eternal Tells me I've a mother there."  The 4th president of the church, Wilford Woodruff, has called this revelation (Woodruff, Wilford. The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, ed. G. Homer Durham. Salt Lake City, 1968. Pg 62).

The line that sticks out to me the most is: "Truth is reason, truth eternal."  Eliza R. Snow reasoned that if we have a Heavenly Father - doesn't it just make sense that we have a Heavenly Mother?  And if she can use logic and reason to discover something that is actually "revelation," then why can't I?  Can God reveal things to us through logic?  Yes, he has done so already if we believe this story about Eliza R. Snow.

I had a third thought to make, which is more rational than logical and it has to do with Adam and Eve.  If you are a Christian, this is perhaps the most important couple in all of history for you.  In Mormon temples, our worship is structured by the examples set by Adam and Eve, and I would just like to kindly point out: it wasn't Adam and Eve and her sister Judith.  If it had been, certainly all of human history would look quite a bit different.  And sure, there are other marriages in the bible, important ones, taking place between a man and more than one women.  But this is the first, the ultimate relationship, Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, all that it takes to have a child and begin to "multiply and replenish the earth."  Father and Mother of all mankind on earth, and we never needed more than one of each.

So... what does this all mean for our church history?  What does it mean if the point I'm making is that polygamy basically flies in the face of all nature and reason?  What does it mean if the most important men to our church, the ones who founded and organized it, participated in such a thing?  Obviously, I don't have an answer.  Honestly I don't even want to make such an accusation, but she asked how I felt about polygamy and in that moment I realized what I truly thought and I felt it so strongly that I haven't been able to stop thinking about it since.  Maybe there were purposes to it in that time of our church's history.  Maybe it was the wisdom of God that such a thing should happen.  Maybe it was a misguided and heavily consequenced mistake.  But I would like to add that not all men that bring good things to pass are perfect or without blemish.  Look at the founders of our country, the amazing ideals and principles to which they held and fought for to establish this country.  How many of them were slave owners?  You could argue that the church founders are supposed to be men of God, whereas the founders of our country maybe shouldn't be held up to quite the same caliber.  So my question is:  Can you be led by God and still make mistakes?




Post script:  I'm sure that not all of my arguments here are complete, I'm sure there are points I'm missing or not taking into consideration, so I invite you to comment and open my mind further, help me to understand this more.  I welcome open discussion on this topic but please try to remain respectful of other's opinions.

Growing pains

A patron came up to me yesterday, a girl who was maybe sixteen or seventeen years old.  The first thing I noticed about her was her glaringly white shorter-than-hot-pants.  Startled, and trying to avert my eyes, I asked her what she needed.

Girl: "There's a book that came in on hold for me."

Me: "Oh, did you get an email or an automated message about it?"

Girl, now glaring at me: "An automated message."

This meant that her book was on our hold wall, and we will usually walk first-time patrons over and show them where it is and how to find their book.  That is, patrons that are nice.  Not sassy patrons who glare at me, especially when wearing underwear-for-pants.

Me: "Great! All you need to do is just head right over there and the books are shelved alphabetically by your last name." (friendly smile)

The girl then jutted one hip out and let her head drop to one side while saying, "Ugh.  I hate doing that.  Can't you get it for me?"

(I'm not exaggerating.  If I was exaggerating I would tell you.  I just wanted to make that clear.)

After weighing some options (telling her she has to grow up and do it herself, giving in and teaching her that she IS entitled and can make people do anything she wants, or punching her in the face), I said, "Okay, why don't you come with me?" and headed over to the shelf.

On the way there I tried to gain some perspective.  "So, what's the problem?  Do you feel overwhelmed by how many books there are and having to look through all of them?"

Girl: "Yeah, well, every time I look myself I can never find it and I end up having to come ask you guys for help anyway."

Alright.  That's understandable... she's frustrated from that, I can get that.  So I found her book (took approx. 4 seconds), and as I hand it to her I'm noticing that she's... rather energetically eating some candy.  Candy that looks an awful lot like the kind we give out to people who turn in Summer Reading reviews.  I decided to turn a blind eye until she said, "Oh, by the way, can I get some more candy from you guys?"

Me: "Sorry, we can only give you candy for turning in book reviews."

Girl, looking at me incredulously: "What reviews?"

Me: "Book reviews for the Summer Reading Program..."  - blank stare from girl - "Did you sign up for the Summer Reading Program?"

Girl: "No."

Me: "Then I can't give you any candy, sorry."

Maybe that sounds stingy?  Grabbling over candy?  But we librarians are a bit protective of our dwindling candy resources... it's a public library for pete's sake.  We're not made of skittles and kit kats.  And it's not just me, each summer we usually get a threatening "keep your grubby hands out of the patron's candy bucket" email (AJ, I'm saying 'threatening' in the nicest, most sweetest possible way *friendly smile*).  We've countered this problem by having staff members bring in their own candy which we keep in a separate bucket to avoid temptation.  And we have a large, ill-tempered woman standing nearby with a firm ruler in hand in case there are any wandering eyes.

Anyway, the girl relented and went on her way, and after I got back to the desk I asked my co-worker if that was, indeed, our book review candy.  She said, "Yes, actually, I had just given a patron their piece of candy for turning in a review, and before I could take it off the desk that girl came up and grabbed a whole handful, even as I was sliding it back across the desk towards me."

Wow.

Dear teen patrons: Learn from this cautionary tale.  There will be people in your life that want to help you, but we won't if you act like you're entitled to it.  Earn the things you want.  Be gracious for the things you get.  Try to keep the glares to a minimum.

All other patrons: I know it's summer and it's hot, but could you keep your shoes on?

In case you needed to laugh your head off today

There's several more episodes on Youtube if you want to see more.  Enjoy =)

Albums: the good, the rad, and the complete mistakes

I know, you're all shocked that this isn't a wheat-related post.  Sorry.  I have to mix it up with boring posts every once in awhile.

Here I am writing about music, which I have done before, but I think it's dangerous territory.  It's pretty hard to convey how you feel about a piece of music even though it may be something that you love and want to share with people.  Getting people to spend three minutes to listen to something is even harder.  And then you're really hit and miss because everyone has such different tastes that most of the time they're not really going to be impressed with something what you're sharing anyway.

Despite how discouraging that is, there is one aspect of music that I want to talk about: the album.  How do you feel about albums?  Because I have had a rocky past with them.

I really hated spending money on albums in high school and getting home and hating 80% of what was on there.  Back then, there wasn't iTunes to preview songs ahead of time, although I did use Amazon from time to time which only had 5 or 6 songs to preview.  And sometimes 30 seconds is not enough, right?  When iTunes finally did come into my life, it was heaven!  99 cents and I could just get the one dang song that I wanted and I stopped wasting money on albums that ended up being 3 hits and 9 duds.  Suddenly my music library flowered into a stellar collection whose "shuffle" setting could only be marred by those unfortunate album songs that I bought in high school.

So, basically, I'm not a fan of albums.  I've heard cases made FOR them, and I can understand how artists are exploring different things musically and artistically and they're putting everything out there for you and sort of have a specific direction and purpose to the whole arc of an album.  My response is: it doesn't really matter, I will still think it was a waste of money if I don't like it (Squirrel Nut Zippers' Perennial Favorites, I'm looking at you).

Having said all this, there are a few albums out there, a few golden tickets where I love most if not all of the songs, albums that I'm happy to pay full price for, and I wanted to list my favorites here.  Not just so I have a handy place to remember them, but also because I usually relinquish musical selections to what I think other people will like, and as a result I don't think that people really know what I like.

I have to add a disclaimer that I'm not going to put any Beatles albums on here, because they are in a whole class of their own and I don't want to hurt any of my other albums' feelings.  So here are my top 7 favorite albums:

7. Gimme Fiction by Spoon

This album is dark and gritty and sexy and I love it.  I really have to be in the mood for it but even when I'm not I still have to admit that this is cool stuff.

6. Hot by Squirrel Nut Zippers
I know this isn't topping any "most awesome albums of all time" lists, but I still like almost every single song and that's something not every album can say.

5. Oh No by Ok Go
Love, love this album.  Fun, sexy, and SO much style.  Flying around on synchronized treadmills was just the beginning, these guys have serious chops.

4. Once.  The only movie soundtrack in my top 7, although there are plenty of good soundtracks out there.  This one, however, leaves them all behind.  Partly because the actual music is so central to the movie itself, and partly because it's just wonderful music.  The friend who introduced me to this movie said, "I just rented it from the store and watched it over and over again, it was just so breathtaking."  I started watching it skeptically and wasn't really paying attention until suddenly, Glen Hansard's voice cried out, "This is what you've waited for" and I stopped everything I was doing - even breathing - and watched.  Absolutely beautiful.

3. Viva La Vida by Coldplay, including the bonus album Prospekt's March.  I'd actually say that I like the bonus album a bit better.  What can I say?  This album actually provides the music for my little Happy Place video from a few years ago, and a few of the songs give me nearly out-of-body experiences.  Haunting, beautiful, joyful, melancholy, etc, etc.  This album packs so much in and it's all good.  Well done.

2. Discovery by Daft Punk.  Adam, thank you for introducing this to me.  I never thought I could like techno before this, and here it is my #2 album.  And my #1 aspiration is to go to one of their concerts before I die.  Or before they stop touring.  Whichever comes first.  Do I love this album because it's so funky?  Is it because I love sci-fi?  Or is there a secret subliminal message in their electronic rhythms that is controlling my brain?  Maybe it's just good stuff.

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.

1. Life Left To Go by SafetySuit.  This is not a well-known album, I think, which is a shame.  When I think about this album I think of words like, "redemptive, liberating, release."  This music just makes me feel free.  I don't think they were doing anything particularly new or ground-breaking, but I absolutely love each and every song on here.  It just all works.







So tell me what you think about albums?  Have you ever bought one that was one great song and the rest were duds?  Or do you like the variety and artistry of a complete album?  What are your favorite albums?

Harvest Time

I looked at my wheat today and noticed that most of the heads were bending down.  So I tested a grain and it was firm and crunchy, and I figured that it was time to harvest.

I figured that harvesting was definitely a two-man job, so Michael obligingly stepped in as my helper to get everything cut and tied.  I was telling him earlier today about needing help with the project, and I sang, "Will you help me harvest my grain?  Will you help me harvest my grain?" Then I said, "See?  You have to help me because if you don't I'll have to sing that song from the Disney cartoon and then you won't get to eat any bread when I'm done."

To which Michael replied, "I'm gonna need to see this cartoon before we go any further."

It turned out that he helped me even without seeing the video, so that was lucky.  Anyway, as we all probably know, the old-timey way of harvesting grain is with a scythe or a sickle, which basically just cut down the stalks and then you lay them together and bind them.  The reason I wanted Michael's help was so that he could do this:

He'd just grab a bunch of stalks and then I used long clippers and just clipped the bottoms of the stalks and we'd do an entire row like that.  Once we had clipped a whole row, Michael would hold all the stalks together while I tied a string around them to make sheaves.  Here's what my handy website says about that:

The next step is to bind the grain into sheaves, each about 12 to 14 inches in circumference — a bunch you can hold comfortably in your hands. Bind the same day you cut the wheat. It’s nice to have two people taking turns cutting and binding. You can bind with cord or baler’s twine or even with some of the wheat stems, twisting them in a way that holds the bundle firm.

So we just bound each row into one sheave and moved on, and the whole harvesting process took about 20 or 25 minutes.  Here's what all of my sheaves looked like when we were done, aren't they pretty?

And here's what my plot looked like when we were through, just a little bit sad:

The next step of the process, curing, sounds easy enough:

Curing the grain. Stack sheaves upright in a well-ventilated, dry location safe from grain-eating animals. Our ancestors stacked sheaves to make shocks in the field, but with small quantities, it’s easy to bring the sheaves in out of the weather. The grain has been cured when it is hard, shatters easily and cannot be dented with your thumbnail.


I have a little work shed in the backyard so I propped my sheaves up in there.  I really don't think they have far to go to get cured and once that's done it's time for threshing and winnowing.  Apart from preparing the plot last fall for the seeds to go in (pulling up weeds, pulling out roots, and digging rows), I'm afraid that threshing will be the most labor intensive part of this process so far.  I have a feeling that I will have to wait until I'm really frustrated and I just want to beat the hell out of something.  Because that's what it's going to take!  So if anyone has an bad news they've been waiting to give me, now's the time. =)

P.S. Now that things are harvested, there are a couple of things that I wish I would have done differently:
1. I wish I had made my rows farther apart.  I think I did them so close together because I had so much seed (and tons left over), and I was trying to get as much in as possible, but it really made weeding difficult.
2. I would lay down a layer of newspaper between each of the rows to discourage weeds from growing between them.  I did consider using some weed killer this year, but I just felt weird about putting down harmful chemicals adjacent to something that was going to potentially grow and possibly feed my baby.  I'm sure that a lot of foods we eat daily are grown in exactly this way, but when the power was in my hands to put those chemicals there or not, I chose not to.