Archive for April, 2010

Sandra Bullock Adopted a “Son” Without a Race?

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

When the news of Sandra Bullock’s recent baby adoption broke with the morning sun, a smile as long as the Louisiana bayou broke out on my face. Here was little Louis’s precious face on the cover of PEOPLE and on every morning television show, nuzzling his glowing mommy. I know that feeling, that intoxicating smell of a milky baby’s breath and sweaty chick-fuzz. And the flip-flops of love and worry that tumble in a new mother’s stomach. My very first emotion was happiness for Sandra, especially in this time of pain over her husband’s bad behavior.

My next thought had to do with the sweet brown melanin in that yummy boy’s skin. How could one not notice how beautiful this baby was? (Aren’t all babies beautiful?) Yet, so many politically correct online bloggers, reporters, and comment posters ignored his race. Kudos to you, but by ignoring a physical trait completely draws attention to it. I mean, if Sandra’s baby had been a blonde tow-head with bright blue eyes, his physical attributes would have been mentioned. So, why the silence over melanin? It seems we are as progressive as we are confused. Afraid to say the wrong thing. Yet to create a race-less society would be to homogenize beauty. How sad.

Here’s what’s wrong. As a single mother of two biracial children the wrong thing is to not mention how cute my kids are. How fabulous their curls spiral. How their mocha complexion looks positively breath-taking in colors like bright orange and turquoise. How their strong brown legs shine in the froth and frolic of ocean play. To ignore human beauty, whether it be white, brown, beige, curly, straight, or frizzy, is to draw attention to race as an “unmentionable.”

Even Sandra, in her PEOPLE magazine interview failed to mention her baby’s appearance, simply calling him “perfect.” Perfect he is, as is every healthy baby, but Sandra, he is also exceptionally gorgeous, partly because of his racial mix.

The thing about beauty is that it is in the eye of the beholder. We are all attracted to a set of visual stimuli that created in our brains through a series of exposures in our formative years. My particular early life experiences happened in Nova Scotia, Canada, where I was born. Many Americans don’t know that the true end of the historical “underground railroad” was Nova Scotia, where run-away slaves sought refuge and safety north of the boarder. To this day there is a huge population of African-Americas (I’m told that title is preferred over African-Canadian) on the east coast of Canada, and when I entered elementary school I attended a fully integrated public school. My first crushes were boys with brown skin. Many of my playmates were black girls. Sitting at my school desk, behind well coiffed braided heads and high cheek bones wrapped in flawless glowing completions, I developed a penchant for that version of beauty. So, it was no surprise to me that I would fall in love with a man with dark skin and give birth to such beauty myself.

Like Sandra’s son, my babies are perfect. But they are also brown. Gorgeous brown. And to say I don’t LOVE they way they look — because of race — would be a lie. I’ll never forget the first time my then three-year-old compared her legs to my white legs in the bathtub. She wanted to know why her legs were brown. I didn’t even have to consider my answer. I quickly responded with, “Your legs are brown because your Mommy is smart. I found the most beautiful man on the planet to be your Daddy because I wanted you to be the most beautiful girl. And it worked.”

All babies are beautiful, but Sandra Bullock, don’t be afraid to scream it from the top of a mountain that your BROWN baby is beautiful.

Connecting in The Age of Technology

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

New Tools. No Rules. That’s what I call the technological revolution.

I have three stories to tell that illustrate how technology is affecting the way we date, mate, and relate.  Story number one comes from the wisdom of a middle school girl, with one entire school semester of dating experience under her belt and a lifetime of tech training. She reminded me that the game of love has a whole new high-tech playing field. I was having dinner in a California Pizza Kitchen with three twelve-year-old girls and I received a text from a 47-year-old guy I’d been dating for about six weeks.

“Oooh” sang my own daughter in an age-old schoolgirl taunt “Is that from your boyfriend?”

I responded with a defensive girlish quip that I perfected twenty-five years ago, “He’s NOT my boyfriend!”

Her friend immediately took meaning from my response and followed firmly with, “Oh, then you only text.” As if to imply that a texting relationship is indeed a kind of relationship but not one that deserves the title of boyfriend.

Then I confused her. “No, we talk too. But only via cell. I haven’t given him my home number yet. And we have dinner dates,” I said.

I watched her eyes widen as her tech savvy mind tried to make sense of what I was saying. “Well, is he your Facebook friend?”

“No.” I said, “We’re not ready for that.”

“Does he follow you on Twitter?”

“Nope.”

Then she gave me a look that read, “How can you sit at the same lunch table with someone who isn’t even online with you?”

It was then that I realized that today, the level of two people’s tech infiltration indicates a level of intimacy and indeed, commitment.

Story number two is a bummer for one almost-bride and reminds us that technology affords few people privacy. This one from a friend. A guy finally gets up the nerve to ask his longtime girlfriend to marry him. Just weeks before the wedding, he finds her tagged in an old photo on Facebook. The photo was innocently posted by a not-so-brainy gal pal as part of a party album and shows the future bride loopy and draped across the lap of an ex-boyfriend. The album is dated and when the groom does the math (Boys are so good at math, aren’t they?) he discovers that this sexy party shot was snapped just weeks before his marriage proposal. Because of this, he calls off the wedding.

Story number three comes from one of my blog readers. A New York City real estate agent is out on a date with a lovely woman who works in television marketing. She is 35, comes from a family that never divorced, loves her sister’s kids to death, and is seriously ready to have a family. The problem is this: The guy she is sitting at the dinner table with has an online love in Dubai, a real world college sweetheart in Chicago whom he keeps in touch via text and email and visits about once a month, and a line-up of local dates waiting in the wings on Match.com. How can he ever hear the call of true love over the din created by so many opportunities for love? And they all exist because of technology.

The Problem

In this high-tech age, our culture and circumstance run interference against that course of evolution. That is, to attach long enough to breed and nurture offspring who can form their own healthy bonds and attachments. Today, healthy attachments are threatened by a permissive society, a sexualized media, too much opportunity that creates “Love ADD”, all fueled by technology.

Technology was designed to keep us connected but it has morphed into a monster that has millions of people keeping in touch, yet touching nothing tender. Take Twitter as a prime example. The text-based megaphone to your contact list limits your feelings to 140 characters or less (including spaces.) Unless you are Ernest Hemmingway, it is impossible to communicate anything of substance with such brevity. Text may be instant, but it is far from intimate. It is a communication void of body language, eye contact, vocal tone, and pheromones. Imagine your favorite band without the drummer or the vocalist and you’ll understand how inferior text communication is. Even longer messages sent via Facebook, MySpace, or traditional Email, may be filled with more words, but can be seriously lacking in emotional content, especially if one is not a very good writer. So much is lost in this kind of communication.

The Answer

Believe it or not, I’m not down on tech. Technology, if used correctly can be a strategic way to find and keep love. It can be used for its original purpose, to keep people connected. To help lovers express what they may be shy to say out loud, to help families schedule tech-free time to relate, and even to help heal the wounds of a relationship rupture. But the key is the knowledge of how to use technology to grow and keep love, and how avoid its hazards. We need a set of tech rules for love and I’m open to hearing your ideas for how to use these new tools to find and keep a mate.

Are Racial Slurs Okay as a Term of Endearment?

Sunday, April 18th, 2010

Recently I began hearing my middle-schooler call her close friend a “blonde.” The manner in which she used the word implied that it was a short form of “dumb blonde.” My kid would come home from school and say things like, “Mom, you know what my blonde said today?” This kind of bothered me. Not just because I happen to be a blonde, but because I have a really hard time hearing anyone defined and entitled by skin or hair color. You’ll hear me point out someone by the color of their clothes long before I mention skin color.

So, I talked to her about it. I told her that movies like “White Chicks” and “Legally Blonde” may make it seem that girls with blonde hair are the last group that are culture allows us to make fun of, but that doesn’t mean it’s right. Then she stunned me with this retort. “Mom, we are best friends. We’re joking. It’s how she knows I love her. And she calls me her maid.”

“Maid?” I asked

“Yah, she said if we were born a long time ago, I would be a slave so she calls me her maid.” Then my daughter peeled into giggles of laughter at the thought. I should tell you here, if you haven’t figured it out already, that my daughter is bi-racial, of Irish and African ethnicity.

This whole expanded definition of the “blonde and maid” friendship didn’t soothe me a whole lot. But it did get me thinking about how terms of endearment are sometimes slurs that spoken in the privacy of an intimacy imply, “This is our special word. Our joke. This separates us from the world and bonds us together,”

A perfect example would be the fact that many African-Americans use the “N” word within their racial circle as a term of affection. Oprah would prefer to erase even that use of the word. Chris Rock thinks it’s powerful. Within the context that it is used, it is a word of acceptance and brotherhood or sisterhood. But damn the person with white skin who accidently thinks they are in the club and uses the word. For many Americans of color, that word, even spoken in love and affection by a white person, represents yet another thing they are robbed of. Call it culture, identity, or simply a group cohesion. When a white person uses the “N” word they are often met with a glare that says, “You will not take that away from us! We remember the historical use of that word.” Curiously, I should also tell you that I have been referred to by the “N” word. It happened often in a loving, intimate way with an old boyfriend who felt proud to call me his, “N.” And I accepted it with love.

But back to maids and blondes. Have our historical trappings become loosened? Are we so far past the tragedies and injustices of the past that this new generation can make light of it? Maybe it’s no different from the “witches” costumes that we wear at halloween, a tragic symbol of hundreds of thousands of women who were mercilessly tortured and murdered for the crime of thinking “out of the box.” Are these middle school maids and blondes doing the same thing? What do you think?

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Five Questions to Ask Yourself Before Your Tear Your Family in Half

A recent report showed that since the recession, the divorce rate in America is the lowest it’s been in 30 years. Divorce is an expensive business and maintaining two households can get steep. So instead, couples are taking a closer look at their relationship flaws and asking themselves if their marriage is “good enough” to stay. If you are in that situation, here are five questions to ask yourself before you tear your family in half.

1. Am I leaving because of boredom or excitement about meeting someone new?

You should know your notions about marriage are up against a media that spins fantasies about youth, beauty, money and sex. If you believe in the family life created by TV and movies, all partners stay fit, youthful, happy and rich. Unfortunately in real life many partners grow chubby, bald, fall into depressions, and lose money in a recession. Sexual energy gets diverted to nesting energy and the excitement of your youthful love affair morphs into a the drudgery of married life. If you answered “yes” to this question, the answer isn’t a new partner, it’s a new system. And you have the power to charge your “good” relationship.

2. Am I leaving because it is finally time that I stop being an enabler of his/her substance abuse, alcoholism, or anger management problem?

If you answered “yes” to this question, then this is a good reason to leave. Families with violence and substance abuse do serious damage to children and spouses, so stop walking on egg shells and make a strong, safe exit plan.

3. Have we sought couples therapy and I have sought individual therapy and really tried everything possible to fix the relationship?

If your answer is “no” then you have to exhaust all possibilities before you bail. It’s only fair to your partner and kids. Even if your husband or wife won’t attend therapy, you can get some great insights into your role in the relationship system by going to individual therapy. For instance, if either of you is dismissive, withdraws, or stonewalls you better learn some conflict resolution skills before you take the dysfunction to a new relationship.

4. Am I putting my kids emotional needs first?

This is a trick question. Our current American culture focusses on individual rights and freedoms over “the group good,” so you will often hear people tell you that it is not right to stay in a marriage for the kids’ sake. I don’t always agree with this. If the kids have close relationships with both parents and there are no substance abuse problems or domestic violence issues, then you owe it to your kids to model a healthy, fulfilling relationship for them. Hopefully that means with their other parent. When people say to me that my kids happiness shouldn’t be more important than my happiness, I correct them and say, “My children’s happiness IS my happiness.”

5. Have I really researched and do I understand the financial, social, and family consequences of single parenthood?

Single parenthood is no cake walk. The financial stress alone can drive one to drink. Then there is the challenge of raising kids who are angry about their parent’s split, especially boys who can really use a man’s strength to help them control their physical impulses. The inconsistency of an EX-spouse who goes MIA just when you really need childcare. Add to that the loneliness where sometimes days go by without any adult contact except for the Mom’s at school drop off. Not to mention, the problem with romance and the tedious business of sifting through the MILF Hunters or Gold Diggers to find a good partner, all the while protecting your children from your heart breaks. Trust me, this life-style is not for the feint of heart.

So, think long and hard before you make the leap out of a salvageable relationship. The old adage that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side of the fence is particularly true here, yet a family with serious dangers is also not healthy for children.

Kate Gosselin: The Single Mother Double Bind

Monday, April 12th, 2010

How can single mothers prove to the courts that they are the better parent when they are being forced to work hard to provide for their kids?


Single mother Kate Gosselin  is sweating it out working on “Dancing with the Stars” and her husband, Jon, has filed for full custody of the kids saying she is working too much and not available for her children. Never mind that he has gone weeks at a go himself, not seeing his kids while he shacks up with a morphing string of girlfriends.

This tragic story reminds me attorney Marsha Clark’s similar crisis while she was working on the prosecution side during the OJ Simpson trial. Even through she had custody of her two boys, her husband used the demands of the trial as an opportunity to try to attain custody himself. So, what’s a single mother to do? Stay home and lose her kids because they are starving to death? This is a double bind where a mother is damned if she does and damed if she doesn’t.

The saddest part of this bind is that it is also a double standard. Tell me the last time you heard anyone admonish a divorced Dad for working too hard!

The problem is that changes in family law have all but eliminated alimony for ex-wives. And child support payments to her are based on a ratio of child custody. So, all single mothers are expected to at least support themselves and they rarely get a full 100% of child support if the kids bunk at Dads some of the time.  Funny thing is, even though kids of divorce may sleep at their Dad’s every other weekend, Mom must still pay the rent for the entire month.

While I am a professional who specializes in attachment issues and my heart breaks for the Kate’s kids who may be suffering attachment injuries while she spends weeks in Los Angeles training and competing for “Dancing with the Stars,” I believe that she is fortunate to have this choice available to her. Only the entertainment industry pays the kind of money that could keep a single mother of eight out of poverty. I mean, really, would people rather see her working for $12 an hour somewhere?

In fact, she recently told Access Hollywood:

“Maybe because I’m in front of the camera so much and people see where I am – I’m in LA. I’m in New York. I’m here or there – the bottom line is I’m just doing what every other mom is doing. They just don’t have cameras following them so people can’t keep tabs on how many hours a day they spend with their kids,” Kate told Billy. “I have to do it. I have eight kids. It’s not a joke, it’s the truth. I have to provide for them.”

You go girl! Dance your butt off for those babies. And then head on home to bond and repair.


An Epidemic of Cheaters???

Friday, April 9th, 2010

First David Letterman, Tiger Woods and John Edwards. Then Jesse James. And now ex-Giant, Tiki Barber is reportedly having an affair with his kid’s babysitter while his wife is pregnant with twins! What’s going on??? The big question on many women’s minds is this. Are more men cheating, or are more men getting caught? I think both things are true.

Cheating husbands are not be a new trend. After all, we are a primate society with what anthropologists like to call “perceived monogamy.” Today 65% of marriages break up because of an extra-marital affair. Despite the sexual revolution and the reduction of the “double standard,” more men still cheat than women. Now science shows us why this gender imbalance has existed for thousands of years.

First, there could be a genetic link. Swedish researchers recently identified an “infidelity gene,” which is present in four of 10 men. This gene can explain why some men are more prone to stormy relationships and bond less to their wives or girlfriends. However, it’s important to remember that biology is not destiny. People born with genetic predispositions to say, heart disease or obesity, make lifestyle adjustments that compensate for the negative gene.

Secondly, men may find it easier to cheat because they feel less guilt than woman. A Spanish study recently revealed that the interpersonal sensitivity (empathy) of men is low compared to women. This clearly could affect a man’s ability to empathize with his partner’s feelings of betrayal. The study also showed that men feel less intense guilt and this difference is particularly stark in the 40-50-year-old age group, a group particularly vulnerable to the mid-life crisis affair.

Finally, more men fear emotional intimacy more than do women. Believe it or not, some men find lovers so they can avoid any real intimacy. Emotional closeness and the expression of vulnerability that goes with it scares many men, so they distance themselves from their wives by cheating on them. At the same time,  they don’t get too emotionally involved with their lovers. This kind of “watering down of the milk” feels safer to some men.

And, why are men cheating more than ever? Like the old joke about why a dog licks his genitals, “because he can.” The biggest sexual boundary that always curbed men’s appetite for sex was a strong woman. It used to be that women provided all the sexual boundaries in our culture. Single women had far too much to lose by entering into a sexual relationship with a man who might abandon them, impregnate them, contaminate them or disgrace them. And their own wives were more protected by stronger family laws that supported divorced women with hefty alimony payments and deterred men from risking divorce. Not today. Thanks to feminism, women are expected to make their own money after divorce. And single women now own their own orgasm and a box of Trojans. So they are off to the races. With so many willing female partners to have affairs with (married and single) men have little to stop them except their own ethics.

And some men have plenty of that. One of my favorite studies linked monogamy to intelligence. The smarter the man, the more likely he is to be faithful. The researchers speculated that monogamy is an intellectual decision that rises above animal instincts and better provides for survival of offspring. Yes, kids from two parent families are likely to do better in life.

As always, my solution to bullet-proof relationships is to grow a bond through emotional intimacy. To make a relationship  rock-solid, one must move a step or two closer to the bone, and hone some relationship skills. Compassion can be learned. Fair-fighting is a skill. And stonewalling is a killer of all connection. Intimacy is not easy nor painfree. Extreme emotional intimacy and mutual care may involve squeamish feelings of shame, the forced expression of awkward words, an ability to see the ugly in others and still love them, and worse,  the ability to glaringly see the ugly in ourselves and still feel lovable. But the pay-back is pure kryptonite. An I’ve-got-your-back-if-you’ve-got-mine emotional contract that can make your relationship affair-proof.


What Does Your “Mom Hair” Reveal? Efficiency or Depression?

Saturday, April 3rd, 2010

We all know the famous new-Mom hair cut. Yep. That’s me with my oldest at her third birthday party. When she was born, I got myself a short, low-maintenance pixie cut that allowed me to reduce my preening time and increase my diaper changing time. I even went one step further than a simple cut and sacrificed my blonde locks for my natural brunette base, thus saving time and money in a colorist’s chair.

There are other forms of “Mom Hair.” Consider the perma-pony tail, a look that keeps tiny hands from pulling mommy’s hair and keeps Mommy’s hands away from a blow dryer. Then there’s the all-telling baseball cap with the “MacDonald’s Employee” pony tail sticking out the back. We all know that signals a long night with a screaming teether.

But there is more than convenience and efficiency in our Mom hair doos. Hair is our most obvious signal to the world of our internal state of mind. Hair can be linked to our moods and even our sexuality. When I look back at pictures of me in my short, dark crop, I shudder with memories of postpartum depression that went undiagnosed. After baby number two, with a little help from Zoloft, I stayed with long, blonde hair. Coincidence? I think not.

Hair is linked to a woman’s sexual attractiveness, and lack of attention to hair can also signal that sexual energy is being temporarily diverted to put the baby’s needs first. The onset of motherhood can bring a shift in identity as women move from being Barbie Dolls to Betty Crockers, all on the way to becoming a fully empowered woman. (Women without children encounter a similar phenomenon as they age and sexual attractiveness becomes less important than their ability to be creative, productive, and to nurture the world.)

It’s perfectly natural for women to care less about their looks while they do the rigorous work of caring for an infant. I am less concerned about a new Mom with her hair in a frayed knot, than the “Hot Mom” who’s wearing her baby as an accessory and ignoring the fact that the babe’s sunhat has been covering her eyes for twenty minutes. Putting baby first is nature’s way.

“Mom Hair” could signal depression if it also includes a lack of hygiene and a lack of desire to primp, ever, even one-in-a-while for the man of the house. So, look closely in the mirror today. What is your hair is saying about you?