Ideology, not reality.

I am currently reading Animals in Translation by Temple Grandin. Temple Grandin is an autistic adult with a PhD in Animal Science that I first learned about in Oliver Sacks's An Anthropologist on Mars. Her musings on B.F. Skinner and Ivar Lovaas take me back to my college days. Both were icons. In the world of Animal Science, as well as in the Autistic Community, Grandin is an icon. Her insights into animal behavior have revolutionized slaughter houses. More than half of the slaughterhouses in North America have used Grandin's designs, including ones used by Wendy's, McDonald's and Burger King.

So, you are thinking, "Isn't Kim a permissive vegan? Where is she going with this?" Well, I have never been to a slaughterhouse. I first became a vegetarian in high school after reading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. The Army man on the plane home from Atlanta today has been to one. He doesn't recommend them. He can appreciate Grandin's techniques though. She thinks that as an autistic person, she thinks more like animals do. She thinks they both see more detail then other "normal" people. Too many trees to see the forest, so to speak. Grandin designs humane slaughterhouses. She designs them because she loves animals and doesn't want to see them stressed. She removes details that stress the animals. She creates the slaughter chutes so that the animals do not know they are about to die. Less stress. Slaughterhouses give her money because without her, with stressed animals, they lose a lot of money. Stressed animals lose weight. Stressed animals don't go into the chutes to be restrained to get vaccines to keep them from getting a variety of illnesses. Stressed animals can injure themselves, creating less valuable meat. All of this means less profit for the owners. So, with her designs, everybody wins.

Grandin writes with the overly detailed mind of an autistic adult. Yet she is poignant. Grandin doesn't understand why people don't see what she sees. She doesn't understand how people can miss things that seem so obvious to her. She doesn't understand how people could advocate the protection of a screwworm when they've never seen the fly or the "hideous, horrible infestations" it creates. She claims in the 60s and 70s things were accomplished within government, at least more so than today. "But today the abstract thinkers are in charge, and abstract thinkers get locked into abstract debates and arguments that aren't based in reality."

The Facts as We See Them

Enter Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. Freakonomics establishes this unconventional premise: if morality represents how we would like the world to work, then economics represents how it actually does work. An exceprt from their chapter on parenting:

Chapter 5: What Makes a Perfect Parent?

The conversion of parenting from an art to a science . . . Why parenting experts like to scare parents to death . . . Which is more dangerous: a gun or a swimming pool? . . . The economics of fear . . . Obsessive parents and the nature-nurture quagmire . . . Why a good school isn't as good as you might think . . . The black-white test gap and "acting white" . . . Eight things that make a child do better in school and eight that don't.

No one is more susceptible to an expert's fearmongering than a parent. Fear is in fact a major component of the act of parenting. A parent, after all, is the steward of another creature's life, a creature who in the beginning is more helpless than the newborn of nearly any other species. This leads a lot of parents to spend a lot of their parenting energy simply being scared.

The problem is that they are often scared of the wrong things. It's not their fault, really. Separating facts from rumors is always hard work, especially for a busy parent. And the white noise generated by the experts-to say nothing of the pressure exerted by fellow parents- is so overwhelming that they can barely think for themselves. The facts they do manage to glean have usually been varnished or exaggerated or otherwise taken out of context to serve an agenda that isn't their own.

Consider the parents of an eight-year-old girl named, say, Molly. Her two best friends, Amy and Imani, each live nearby. Molly's parents know that Amy's parents keep a gun in their house, so they have forbidden Molly to play there. Instead, Molly spends a lot of time at Imani's house, which has a swimming pool in the backyard. Molly's parents feel good about having made such a smart choice to protect their daughter.

But according to the data, their choice isn't smart at all. In a given year, there is one drowning of a child for every 11,000 residential pools in the United States. (In a country with 6 million pools, this means that roughly 550 children under the age of ten drown each year.) Meanwhile, there is 1 child killed by a gun for every 1 millionplus guns. (In a country with an estimated 200 million guns, this means that roughly 175 children under ten die each year from guns.) The likelihood of death by pool (1 in 11,000) versus death by gun (1 in 1 million-plus) isn't even close: Molly is roughly 100 times more likely to die in a swimming accident at Imani's house than in gunplay at Amy's.

Some highlights from the Today Show, where I seem to gain most of my knowledge from (hey, that's where I learned about Krav Maga!), include the following:

• Kids will be smarter (or perhaps it was "do better in school") if you wait until you are 30 to have them.

• Additional income makes a difference in their lives.

• Having books around, but not necessarily reading them, is important.

• Staying home with your kids until they are in kindergarten is not important.

• Neither is watching TV.

What both of these books, Animals in Translation and Freakonomics, seem to point out: Common sense is what matters the most!

Well, I guess if you don't have it, you're screwed. I don't understand how some people miss so many things that seem like common sense to me. Perhaps I am lacking in other areas, as Temple Grandin is with her autism. She has found her weaknesses have become her strengths. Mine seem to serve me fairly well (this is what I do for a living).

Reality, not ideology.

I voted for George Bush. Yes, I admit it.

I did not vote for him because I agree with his views on the death penalty. I am whole heartedly against the death penalty, even in cases close to home.

I did not vote for him because I think we should explore the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. I donate money to protect it.

I also am not a conservative freak (I think those were the words used on NPR) who voted for Bush therefore believe that Montgomery County(MD) school children should not be taught the facts of life.

Kids have sex.

People are gay.

I voted for Bush because I want my planes to stay in the sky. I feel safe with him as president. The rest, grass roots organizations can handle.

I also find him attractive... Same goes for Tony Blair.

So what if they look and act like old fraternity brothers. A lot of my freinds are old fraternity guys. I was in a sorority. I was a cheerleader. I voted republican. I am a working mother. These are labels, but they don't define me.

I am more than that.

Just as there is more to most issues than just black and white answers.

How to get this back to Harry?

Here is an update:

The kid is as happy as can be! Unbelieveable!

He is attached to both of his parents, yet he still loves to see his friends at daycare. How can that be?

He still wakes up at 4:30, but we are working with The Sleep Lady to fix this. If that doesn't work, we will try something else. Can you do that?

Harry feeds himself. He is very independent, even though I did not nurse him or co-sleep. Hmmm...

Harry is very into his sliding board and his bike and his swim class. He also reads books. He loves to read. We don't know all of what he is saying, but he understands the concept. Right now he is reading Dogs and Baby Einstein: Discover and Play. Could he be both an athlete and a scholar?

He tries to do the motions to Itsy Bitsy Spider and sign language to ABC's.
He likes kisses from Bailey. I don't. He's his own person.

And if he wants to, when he turns 18, he can choose to vote Democratic.

But don't think I won't question why. He can choose to do whatever he wants to do, provided there is thought behind it.