Vaccines

I've run into a lot of frustrating arguments from people who normally are very reasonable, when discussing vaccines, especially in reference to my newborn. These people are fueled by some kind of blind faith in the medical industry and its rhetoric. That's wrong, and they should knock it the f*ck off.

The truth of the matter about vaccines is that each individual one needs to be assessed by its potential effects. Whether or not the pros outweigh the cons is totally different from vaccine to vaccine. Being all for, or all against them is silly. Some of them work, and some of them simply make a lot of money for big pharma. Either way, they're all getting sold, and pushed, as something that people not only need to do for themselves, but for others. This is very successful marketing, but ought to be analysed as such, and not as scientific fact.

Medications in general need to be assessed, and I urge everyone here to do a lot of research before they decide to add a new non-food chemical into their life, just because someone made a pitch for it. It's not about getting a 'second' opinion. You already have that by going to a doctor, or listening to an ad campaign. You need to get a FIRST opinion, that is, your own.

Links:

• http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/- a site full of valuable and non-zealous analyses of vaccines. Go there and read everything.

(More) Thoughts on Circumcision

We had, long before the baby was born, hashed out whether we wanted to circumcise, and there were so many reasons not to do it, that I don't understand why people ever do.

First off, I consider myself to be a feminist, and as such, consent is something I'm very aware of in daily life. I believe children are an oppressed class, and this flows from my desire to understand the complex social caste system we have in The Western World (did that need to be capitalized?).

While there are necessary decisions parents have to make for the well-being of their children, many choices are made in that spirit without actually being necessary. Circumcision falls directly into that category. There is no reason to circumcise at an early age. That child probably would not, and definitely can not consent to having part of their genitals amputated at the age of zero; and what can it possibly hurt to at least wait until they can weigh in on such a big decision about their body?

Other issues come to mind as well. It's a painful procedure -often performed without anesthesia- which some think can cause life-long emotional scarring. It permanently destroys glands at the tip of the penis that help to protect it, shielding it from discomfort and keeping it more sensitive for a better (or at least gentler) sex life. In addition to the risks and possible complications from an unnecessary surgery, one needs to consider the medical myths that are cited as reasons to circumcise; that is, most (if not all, I'm not fresh on this subject like I once was) of the claims about positive health effects have been proven incorrect.

That said, I'm a little sad that my baby won't be the same as me. I'm circumcised, and I'm sure he'll have questions about why we're not the same. I do, however have options. The easiest course of action is to simply keep a very open dialogue about society, the pressures there from, and why we decided to let him choose what to do with his body. Another option is foreskin restoration, which has been a subject of interest for me lately. I won't go into the details for that, but it's well-documented online.

I want my son to grow up thinking that his body is his own to govern, and I also hope that he will feel the same about others, and accordingly accept people for who they are, and what they decide.

Links

• Mothering: The Case Against Circumcision
• Women and Children:  Oppressed Citizens

New Arrival, Slightly Late Post

The baby is here.

The birth was incredible. I feel so fortunate to have been able to do a birth at home, with safety and comfort. I can't imagine the stress of having a baby in a hospital, because even the midwives' tiny amount of involvement made me nervous. It was really incredible, though, to watch a person come from another person. I couldn't believe it when it was happening, and I couldn't believe it after it had finished.

Now, three or so weeks into the baby being here, I can't imagine life without the baby. Every other thought is consumed with concern and interest for him, and I struggle while at work (I'm working from home, as of late) not to just get up and run into the other room every time I hear him make a noise. Fortunately, my partner is able to spend almost all of her time with him.

My days consist of working 8 hours (usually broken up into two or three hour chunks), doing a load of laundry (it was two loads of laundry a day at first), and doing the majority of the cooking and dishes. My in-laws (whose basement we occupy) have tried to help a bit, but I've been pretty adamant about getting things down as much on my own as possible.

We're not circumcising, which I consider to be a simple matter of consent. Since he can't tell us whether or not he wants part of his genitals amputated, we're going to go ahead and opt out of that for the time being. He can always remedy it later if he wants (who would want to?). The whole thing has made me wonder about my having been circumcised as a baby, and what lasting psychological effects that has had on me. I've heard of people restoring their foreskins, through a number of methods, the most appealing of which is using a weight to stretch the remaining skin over the tip of the penis. It doesn't repair the permanently damaged mucous glands that are destroyed during a circumcision, but it allows for the apparatus to function in a very similar fashion to an uncut one.

All right. The end.  Good bye.

Links:

• The benefits of homebirth
• Foreskin restoration

Free Market

The 'free' market has been an environment where some very good ideas have taken root and come to fruition. No matter where one is in the world — no matter what the system of trade and government — micro-economies with their own, organically-derived rules always find ways of not only surfacing, but undermining what infrastructure is currently there. It is essential that our system of trade is regulated in response to how it actually works, as opposed to unquestioning deregulation in the name of freedom.

Modern Conservatives* would have the world believe that the free market can only stay free when there are as few rules as possible. For many reasons, this is untrue.

Free in what way? Free to do what? Does a free market mean a market without rules? Can everyone be free if there are no guidelines?

In many people's minds, the idea of free market is much more accurately described as a market in which small ideas can become big, individuals become successful, and new organizations are given the opportunity to grow and become self-sustaining. This has also been referred to as the American Dream, which has a definition that is subject to entropy.

In order to have a world full of good ideas, and strong follow-through, it is clear that there must be rules. Opportunities must be provided and protected, merit must be understood, and merit must be broadcast. Without strict guides for this process, merit becomes secondary to a kind of miscommunication that stunts the progress of modern technology, blocks cultural development, and rewards those responsible with immense wealth and power.

It's been said that rules are limitations; but with certain decisions already made, doesn't that allow us more time and resources to focus on the details that matter?

*What on earth are they conserving? What a silly name.

Creation Myth

In the beginning, there was nothing. Then, oddly, there was something. It was a bit hectic, and then there was a period of rearranging.

This was a long and laborious process, but it worked out so that not everything was shooting around everywhere and exploding all the time.

Suddenly, there were a bunch of really tiny things that might have looked like they had the intent to recreate themselves as much as possible. They might have been alive, or not.

Then they were alive. This was primarily because a bunch of them had got together and formed a group, which was quite a bit better at reproducing itself than just a single one.

The groups grew very rapidly in numbers, and eventually they all forgot they were groups and thought of themselves as individuals. This was useful for reference, but kind of muddied everyone's autonomy.

These individuals were happy for a while, but then there came a plague: The individuals were competing, cooperating, and eating each other! Many of the individuals realized that the only way they were going to survive, was by banding together into communities.

For a while, the communities were good. Eventually, though, there were a lot of communities, and the communities began to think of themselves as individuals. This was awkward to describe.

These new kinds of individual things eventually learned to move in packs, bands, murders, schools, and all sorts of other mobile institutions. There got to be so many of these, that they, too, began to think of themselves as individuals.

These newer, even larger kinds of individuals competed, as well; pretty much similarly (except in scale) to their hierarchical predecessors.

Some of them wondered if they were supposed to be part of something even larger, but didn't really speculate very far into the matter. Many began to realize that no matter how big their communities got, they would still be very small, relative to the rest of everything else.

Some of them wondered if the whole thing even mattered, because really, who was watching? Some speculated that someone very large or far-away was watching, but no one had any proof.

Links:

• Information about Douglas Adams, the writer I'm basically (stylistically, poorly) ripping off with this post.
• The Unitarian/Universalist Church, from which I get many of my views about religion.

Bringing Kid(s?) Into the Picture

My partner is pregnant, and I find it to be terrifying. Not the her being pregnant part, but the me having to look out for someone who doesn't know how to look out for themselves part (the baby, not the pregnant woman, jeez!).

I know our baby is going to be beautiful, and wonderful, I'm not worried about that, because I feel like we are wonderful. Kids tend to turn out like their parents, unless there's some serious resistance, and I'm just guessing, that since my partner and I are pretty nice and all, the resistance won't be there. I just don't want our baby to live in poverty for the early years of her life.

I guess this requires some back story, but where should I start? I guess by saying that I don't have a job. I don't have a job. That sucked to say. I don't want to say that ever again. I guess I kind of have a job, but it's freelance, and it doesn't pay all that well. Honestly, I wouldn't mind being poor if it meant that we could still eat.

The missus and I tend to drop some serious dough at the grocery store every week, and since I lost my full time job (through no fault of my own, damn it) we've had to cut back on our spending. It's not that I'm pompous (actually, maybe it is), it's just that information is often as much a curse as it is a power. My information has told me a few inconvenient things about food, politics, and the capitalist system. I guess I'll make a bullet list of them, because there are a few:

• Every time money is spent in the capitalist world, a vote has been cast toward the production practices of the individual or group who is providing the goods or services. That's right, every single item in your home that was made in China is a vote that you willingly made to support a country that abuses its workers without a flinch. How many items do you own that weren't fabricated in China?
  
  
• Foods that aren't organic are poisonous. Life would be so much easier if this weren't true, but it is. Genetic engineering would be a good thing, if it were being used for the right reasons. It's not, currently. It's being used to produce crops that generate their own pesticides. Do we really want to be eating that? The answer is no, and there's plenty of evidence to back it up.
  
  
• Factory farmed meat is not only unhealthy to eat, but it's immoral for it to be produced. Honestly, even if you ignore the facts about health issues, do you really think it's a good idea to be eating misery?
  
  
  
• Corporations with lobbying power in this country are influencing our educational institutions and our eating habits. These corporations tend to produce grains the cheapest, which is why grains currently are at the base of the food pyramid. Food stamps, for example, can only be used for the purchase of certain foods. Most of these foods are made from white flour. I could probably go on a rant about how feeding the poor bad food keeps them poor, but I think I'll save that for another day.
  
  
• It's better for the planet to buy local in just about every way I can imagine.
  

These and a myriad of other reasons keep our wallets empty, and our pantry not totally full. I don't want to raise my child perpetually hungry, and so I've been working to the bone to get another job. One that pays. Until then, we'll just have to tiptoe through the land of sparse funds and hope for the luck to be on our side.

Links:

• The Weston A. Price Foundation, a good resource for people who are interested in food politics, and learning some of the problems with the modern medical system.
• A little bit about factory farms, and why they're maybe not so great.