Sigh. A year ago, I would have been shocked. Michelle Alexander's and Marie Gottschalk's books did a good deal to raise my consciousness of different factors that make the incarceration of people who are actually innocent possible. The Innocence Project has profiles of actual cases they've pursued and exonerated, utilizing DNA evidence to prove the actual innocence of people incarcerated, in some cases of as long as 30 years.

Interesting... I don't know that parties here have sufficient internal cohesion for me to feel this. Here -- maybe especially specifically here in my tiny purple state, where more people are registered unaffiliated than with either of the major parties -- I feel like I'm casting a vote for an individual, not a party platform. And particularly at the state and local level, the values of individual candidates very often don't align particularly cleanly to the Loud Voices Proclaiming the Party Platform. Connecticut, land of Lowell Weicker Republicans and Joe Lieberman Democrats... ... and I also very often find myself agreeing with some of a candidates' policies and disagreeing with others, and therefore having to do a sort of matrix weighting analysis to come out with a net preference, lol... and the idea that a friend or family member weights different policies more or less heavily than me and comes to a different rank order is neither surprising nor difficult for me... (Which is maybe why I'm relatively likely to cross party lines, particularly at the state and local levels.)

You got the scoop! My Hamilton fangirl will be sooooo elated. She and two equally manic fangirl friends are skipping school on Friday to go to New York and get his book signed. Delighted re Tubman over Jackson as well.

re truly core values, and how few political candidates / positions actually approach them: I agree with this. Both my husband and I tend towards being news junkies, and though we're more or less aligned on most policies and we do talk about politics a good bit, I am *far* more likely to cross party lines than he (he actually twitches if he knows I'm going to do so, lol, so I generally don't offer it unless he asks). But it's very, very rare that an issue really crosses into fundamental, core values. But it can. Staying well out of the US field, here is an example: I lived for a year in the Philippines, and one of the candidates currently up for election there recently made comments about a gang rape/murder that do speak to my core. That kind of response -- hovering in a zone between trivialization and outright glorification -- strikes me so squarely in the gut, on such a fundamental core level, that to know that a friend or family member continued to support that candidate would seriously diminish my estimation of the person. God help my marriage, if it were my husband; I really don't know how I would wind my way through such a collision of values. There are very, very few examples like that, though. Fortunately. :lol: and :iagree: Quill, I'm sorry you're going through this. The only solace I can offer is, it's finite. November will come, November will go, and as you know, the earth will continue to orbit.

I'm 52, 5'4 and around 125. I was closer to 110 in college but I feel OK where I am. Active, though not as much as when I was in college or as some women I know. When I was young, I could eat whatever I wanted. I was active, but I ate a LOT. Now.... (still not done with menopause, SIGH), ... I would say that's pretty much it, for me and other women my age I know who've more or less stayed more or less close to where we've wanted to be throughout. I don't count calories (or carbs or fat or anything else), but I also don't eat big portions or seconds or snacks, and generally stick more or less to unprocessed, and only eat dessert on Sabbath. It was a drag when I first worked out that I had to dial it back, but truly, you get used to it. I eat whatever I want, just not very much of it.

Fun thread. The breeder-families around here (suburban/edge of rural CT) seem to go mostly for labs and retrievers and larger poodle mixes and the occasional husky/shepherd/wolfhound. Most of our friends (and we) have organic, slave-free, non-gluten, nut-free designer pound hounds, though. My aunt and uncle had a rescue black and tan coon hound. *Swoon.* You never see them around here. Just beautiful dogs.

It's not stonewalling to redirect when someone else is badgering. That's not OK. I agree with the several pp who suggest ditching the morning news chat (which otherwise sounds lovely in normal times, BTW) for the duration of the election. You could try suggesting something else as a substitute (a morning walk? a fitness date?). If he asks, just tell him, you're badgering me, it's not fun anymore, it's not working for me. Once we get to the other side, we'll try again!

I'd echo LS and OhElizabeth, here. I think it *is* different for a child with ASD. In the short run, "socialization" as it currently looks like from his current situation may look more like a hindrance than a help... and it might well seem like it'd be easier / happier just to bring him home... ... but as parents, you and your husband need to think through the long game. As both LS and OhE pointed out upthread, he prefers adult company now not just because they're more at "his level" intellectually, but also because with adults he's less called on to read cues, take turns, not interrupt, follow the other person's lead in conversation or activities, etc... ... but by the teenage / adult / employment years, he'll need those skills; and ASD impedes his ability to pick them up without explicit instruction and more practice than an NT kid needs. The school district does not get to encourage him out just because his needs are hard for them to meet. The school district does not get to write up an IEP which doesn't include explicit instruction in social skills, and present it to you "take it or leave it." That's not how it works. Unless you have the resources (financial, and availability of private services within reasonable driving distance, and logistical capability of getting him there), I'd be careful about surrendering all claim to district services. He's only 6. You don't yet know what he's likely to need going forward.

Aww, that's wonderful. Is this the same trip in which you were hoping to meet up with your own sister at the airport? If so how'd that part go?

I agree. All we can do is provide counterbalance to the cultural surround. It still surrounds. That's no different than any other area in which our family values diverge from the cultural surround -- materialism generally, consumption patterns complicit with labor practices and/or stewardship, racism, whatever. All we can do is provide counterbalance to the wider cultural messages that they will still absorb. It's harder talking about sex, though.

:iagree: ... and in the absence of open and honest talk-talk-talking with adults whose values they (more or less, even if deep down, lol) trust about what healthy and mutually joyful sex looks like, unreciprocal / coercive pornography becomes a primary resource for young men and women alike to work out how it's all supposed to work. What could possibly go wrong?

re "who's training them to believe these things? I certainly do not..." Of course you don't! I don't either. That's not *at all* what the author is suggesting. The argument is not that someone is purposely training (least of all parents) these things; more that the current context is having the effect of laying a very unhealthy set of expectations... which have an effect, and in so doing, train. The book speaks to the cultural surround -- aspects like the pornography discussed in this thread, trends in social media and other technological fronts, "hookup" expectations, certain types of music (not just hip hop FWIW)... and also, on the flip side of the Cultural Divide, purity pledges and abstinence campaigns that make young women the "keeper" of sex which is still seen in male terms.... ...The author argues that the dynamics on BOTH sides of the divide leave parents unable or unwilling to address sexual reciprocity -- that throughout the current landscape of young adults, sexual gratification is viewed as something young men want and young women are seen in mostly instrumental terms, expected to buck up and provide on demand without expecting much in terms of their own pleasure (the only Culture Divide difference being before vs. after marriage).

:lol: I'm 52. When I attend gatherings of mothers of kids my 13 yo's age, some of them strike me as just adorable, lol...

Re Peggy Orenstein's Girls & Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape : It's a hard read. My daughters are 21 and 13, with my 17 yo son in between. I originally got it because based on reviews I thought it was something I wanted to share and discuss with the oldest -- she went through a phase in middle school/early high school where she hoovered up parenting books, including several by Orenstein, and we found then that reading a book together was often a kind of access ramp to discussing difficult topics: it gave us a common vocabulary and analytical framework, and a sort of distance, to talk about tough topics. About a third in, I realized dang, E's already been through much of this. It's S who really needs to hear it, now, before she's up against some of the dynamics being talked about. (A hard recognition, BTW, one which I maybe wasn't ready to accept when my eldest was only 13.) The chapters work through a number of aspects, including pornography, of "the complicated new landscape" that our kids live in. The overall theme woven through is a construct of "intimate injustice," which I will paraphrase as young women are being trained up to expect that sex will be nasty brutish and short. Young men are being trained up to feel entitled to unreciprocal gratification, up to and including degrading and coercive acts such as those celebrated in (certain types of) pornography and music... and in the absence of other counterbalancing messages, young women also are being trained to think in terms of pleasing men, rather than their own agency or their own capacity for/right to pleasure. I'm having both my daughters read it, and have given it to the mother of my 13 yo's best friend (who also happens to head the board of our local domestic violence center) so I can talk to her about it as well... along with another friend whose daughter is 14. But it's really unsettling to think that girls that young need to hear this stuff -- as I said, I think I would have resisted that notion when my eldest was that age. Somewhere by 16, though, I really do believe the conversations need to be had, and the book gives a very sound analytical framework for the discussions. It's a different discussion with sons, but the term "intimate injustice" is I think a useful construct.

(Not Christian, FWIW, so if that renders my thoughts on the subject irrelevant, please skip down to the next post, lol...) I believe pornography is mostly bad for women in the short run; very often quite disastrous for the ability of men and women to relate reciprocally within longterm relationships in the long run; and inevitable. Where there's demand, there will be supply. re clamping control vs. creating context: This is largely where I come out too. So long as our kids are under our direct control, we can clamp down control, and there are times when that's appropriate. But by the time we blink a few times, they'll be out on their own, so the long game has to be helping them -- daughters as well as sons -- get to a place where they expect and want their long term relationships to be reciprocal and healthy and based on mutual respect. Pornography trains them BOTH the other way (even if our daughters aren't actually watching it). So for me the long game is all about creating context -- talk-talk-talking, explicitly and often and in every possible context, about reciprocity and agency in relationships... including talk-talk-talking about the many instances in the public domain, including pornography, where it isn't there and trains habits of mind and body in ways that will make deeper relationships later very difficult. These discussions look different with my daughters than with my son. (I just gave both my daughters, as well as two friends with daughters, this book, which I count as my most important read of 2016 thus far). I agree with the first bit, and would only add: the far easier access to this type of violent degradation affects our daughters too. Our daughters also need to hear, early and often and from adults they trust, that predatory/violent/unreciprocal encounters are not normative. That type of pornography (yes, there are other types, this is the type that concerns me) trains young men to expect unreciprocated and degrading acts. Unless we talk (yes, it's hard to talk), young women don't have any kind of counterbalance. _____ To your second bit... I dunno. The time between ages 13 and 18 goes really, really fast. And to me it's a bit of a punt to say, well, I did my best, I clamped down control in the days I had control, I can't help it if they go nuts once they're 18... to me, it's really incumbent that we use that precious limited time between 13 and 18, that late last interval that we have to influence their ethical development, to frame and TALK about our values within the acknowledged context that very very soon they'll be making their own choices. Yes. Hmmm. Well, certainly there are all types in all religious communities, sure. Just so you know, many non-Christians DON'T look at it that way, as well.

Yeah, I cant remember the brand of my new thick one but it's substantially more substantial than my foodie friend's Pampered Chef. I haven't had it long enough to warrant its longevity but there's definitely MORE to it than her PC. Pizza really is better 450+.

I had two cheap round ones crack over a 20-year interval, although to be fair I did drop each of them onto my ceramic tile floor, and the tiles cracked worse. :thumbdown: Sigh. Now I have a much heavier, thicker, larger, rectangular one. I like the larger rectangular size -- it still works for pizza and is better for larger loaves of bread. God help us all if I ever drop that puppy; I'd bring the house down.

I was a tree climber too. We had a massive silver pine behind our house and I would go up to the very top, where the limbs were thin and would sway and bend with my weight. Oh how I loved that tree. I found out years later my mother would watch from the kitchen window, too scared to call out at me because she was afraid she'd startle me and I'd fall. Which I never did. Good times.

I did sports as a teen and also ran 3-5 times a week. There's a lot to be said for sports, especially I think for young women -- the camaraderie, the leadership/team dynamics, and the valuing-strength-and-competence-of-bodies (rather than just physical attractiveness). As a young adult I messed up a knee to the extent that I can't run on it anymore -- I just can't take the pounding. I've never found anything else that is as easy / affordable / time efficient / can-do-it-anywhere as running. We have an elliptical at home (I can do that, because it supports my weight such that there's no pounding), and I use it, but it is so.dang.boring I could just weep. I'd far rather get outside. I do walk my dog, but that hardly does the job cardiovascularly, sigh.

We spent 10 months wandering the world a few years ago. My husband was working remotely for much of that time, and I was homeschooling the kids for all of it, so it wasn't "vacation" per se-- we stayed put for 1-2 weeks at a time, and spent lots of days mostly in our temporary "home" working/studying -- but we were living out of one suitcase each (and a whole lot of books and school cr@p), away from real home and out of our comfort zones. I'd do it again in a heartbeat if we could work out how. My son and I spent a month last summer in Guatemala and it was divine.

re our eyes and sizing have gotten accustomed to larger sizes: So true. When I was in college I wore a size 4 at Ann Taylor and Talbots. Three kids and three decades later, I still do. I assure you I am NOT the same size. My eldest daughter is now in college, same height and weight and basic frame size as I was when I was her age. She wears a 2 or a 0 at Ann Taylor and Talbots. What does size 0 even mean?

I do think this is regional. Around here, first names are the norm. Teachers and coach-type figures are the only ones that use titles (some -- eg preschool -- with first names; school age teachers usually last names; and both Coach/Master/Sensei (LastName) and Coach (FirstName) are common. My youngest is 13 and she refers to the parents of all her friends' parents by first name, as well as her religious school teachers and studio art teachers. By high school, some teachers go by first name too. At my older daughter's, perhaps half; at my son's, maybe a third, usually the younger ones. ETA: I totally concur with Tanaqui that people should be called whatever they want to be called. And if I have any reason to wonder -- a person older than me, lol, or from a different region, or who seems a bit more formal, I'll ask. The norm, though, is first names outside of structured teacher/student relationships.

re stereotypes only count as prejudice if they are negative: This was largely the view of my basically well-intentioned family growing up. Blacks are better athletes/more musical/better dancers, Asians are better at math/violin, women are more nurturing, gay men can sing better/have better design sense, etc -- so long as the stereotype was "positive," no problem. We all got scope for growth.

re making photo books Oh, I thought you were actually making some of them on iPhoto. Can't you upload from the iPad to Dropbox or something not-Mac and then drag them over to Shutterfly? The iPads in our house are my daughters' -- I use both a MacBook and a PC -- so I've never tried this, but I would think so?

re measurement systems: OK, that cracks me up. (Since the form doesn't take a 3-digit number in the "pounds" field-- which BTW really would seem to an easy fix if bbc were interested in mining global data-- I had to convert pounds to kilos.) That is even goofier than the American measurement system of miles / ounces / Fahrenheit etc. You go from pounds, to calculating how many 14-pound stones plus the leftover pounds? And that's really how people think of their weights? :lol: Anyway, I'm really 52 but came out as 46. When I tinkered to see how I could improve, the two items that made a difference were to fast (not happening!) and to somehow become an optimist (I actually struggled with how to answer this -- like many people who aren't by disposition outwardly bubbly/sunny/cheerful on a day-to-day basis, I think of myself as a realist with deep and enduring hope for the long term... but as that was not among my choices, I answered mostly-pessimist).