Still Waiting For the Big Reveal: Blogging for Books: What Are You Waiting For: The One Thing No One Ever Tells You About Sex. A Review.

The following is a book review for the Blogging for Books program through Waterbrook Multnomah Publishing. The publisher's posting of this review can be found here.

What Are You Waiting For: The One Thing No One Ever Tells You About Sex by Dannah Gresh, is the author's newest book in her campaign to encourage women to maintain sexual purity until marriage. Gresh covers a variety of topics relating to sex and sexuality in sixteen chapters and 178 pages. Several of the chapter titles seem particularly riveting including "The Lesbian Question", "Friends With Benefits" and chapters designated for topics including pornography and masturbation. Gresh claims that her book holds the secret to fulfilling sex and the reason that women should hold sex as sacred and reserved for their husbands.

In this book Gresh adequately answers some relevant questions about sex and aids readers in navigating issues complicated by pop culture and media. Her conversation regarding the effect of pornography on love and marriage illustrates that a brain addicted to porn can lose it's sensitivity and capability to love because it is overcome by lust. She uses scientific explanations to describe how the porn addicted brain is desensitized to love and becomes hooked on the need for pornographic stimulus. Gresh also gives readers advice concerning relationships in which pornography is an established problem.

The author gives useful advice to young women seeking to maintain their sexual purity and helps readers to not cross "the line" into premarital sex. She discusses kissing, fondling, and the burning question of whether or not oral sex is really sex. She offers readers helpful advice for refraining from situations in which their intentions could be compromised by physical desires. She also urges young girls to practice modesty in their clothing choices to avoid creating situations in which sexual temptation is more difficult to resist.

Gresh carefully weaves scientific information throughout the book and explains how the female human brain reacts to sexual stimuli through the creation of oxytocin which creates a chemical attachment to the sexual partner. Gresh calls this chemical attachment "emotional glue" (p. 114) and asserts that this is why casual sex is not possible; every sexual encounter causes the participants to be emotionally bonded whether they choose to be or not. Gresh also uses scientific evidence to illustrate how physical love is biologically emotional and that human sex is biologically different than sex between animals. (p.43-44) She also explains to readers that "not all sex is the same" (p.35) and encourages readers to search for the experience of sex that goes beyond only the physical act.

One of the author's more triumphant moments is her illustration of the standard that Christian women are called to. She demonstrates that communion with God is not a pious attitude and living as close to the sexual line as possible without sinning. She indicates that closeness with God comes from living honestly and performing regular self-checks to maintain an honest and strong relationship with God. She calls her readers to pursue "a life that is free from any hint of sexual sin." (p.118)

The book falls short in several instances though including rather simple theology that does not leave readers with much sense of spiritual growth. Although her discussion of the Hebrew language and her examination of the Bible's original meaning in verses relating to sex and sexuality are interesting, they are not quite deep enough to be more than somewhat impressive. The point of this book, the secret that Gresh promises to share, is not revealed until chapter four of the book, and when revealed, does not really offer anything particularly mind-blowing.

The author's writing style is also somewhat distracting as she seems to be overly intent on connecting with a younger generation rather than communicating her ideas. Words and phrases such as "girl", "push pause, push play" (p.112) and references to establishments in her immediate locale (p.134) make it difficult to focus on the topics she believes are important. Although this writing style may be appropriate for teenaged readers it is probably not appealing to readers at the college level or beyond. Additionally, Gresh tries to add relevance to some of her topics through inclusion of comments made and questions posed by young (college age) women. Unfortunately her research pool is not very broad and in chapter 12, "The Line", her conversations with college age girls seem to be restricted to only her two interns. (p.111)

The work is not free from the commonplace Christian guilt on this particular subject either. Gresh relates a conversation she had with a young woman who had allowed a recent boyfriend to get "under her shirt" (p. 45) and the woman's deep sense of guilt and shame regarding the incident. Gresh indicates that she encouraged this young woman by reassuring her of "how much of herself she still had to give to her future husband." (p.45) While this seems like an excellent point of consolation, it seems that some reference to God's forgiveness and a repentant spirit might be more relevant to spiritual growth than a conversation about one's future spouse. In a later chapter, Gresh uses verbiage that seems condescending and sententious when she discusses "preparing your heart to confess (sexual sin) to your future husband" (p. 125). Additionally, her advice regarding sharing past behaviors with a boyfriend until "you are certain that the relationship is headed toward marriage" (p. 123), although well-meaning, may disappoint young women who wait too long to share important details of their lives with future partners.

What Are You Waiting For, regrettably, left me waiting for something of a little more substance. This book claims to be more ambitious than it actually is and, although it covers relevant topics, it only minimally does so. Sixteen chapters in 178 pages does not leave much room for real depth and spiritual growth. The author seems to be more intent on convincing women to maintain sexual purity than on fostering a deeper relationship with God.

The book is probably best for girls between 13-17 years old. The writing style and minimal spiritual depth will probably cause disappointment in older readers. I would recommend this book to young girls interested in this topic and who are beginning question the biblical significance of sexuality and encounter the many sexual issues and questions that are prevalent in modern culture. It would also be a useful tool for parents (particularly mothers) of teenage girls who are looking for an avenue to discuss these issues and questions with their daughters.

For a chance to win a FREE copy of this book, please rate my review here.

I received this book from the publisher.

Babies and Stuffitis: The Marketing Campaign to Empty Your Wallet. Part 2 - Ignoring the Force-Fed Guilt to Determine What You Need!

Read Part 1 of this article here. A Google search for "list of necessary baby items" resulted in more than 52 million hits. This is not terribly surprising, considering the target audience of baby items, the monstrous marketing campaign for all things baby as well as the ability of Google to find anything and everything on the web. Conservatively we can say that maybe one quarter of those hits are actually relevant to the search topic- this still leaves over 12 million results perhaps slightly related to the subject at hand: babies and stuffitis.

The most common items listed in the search were things like a crib, crib mattress, stroller, infant carseat, highchair, playpen (pack-n-play), changing table, rocker, diapers, formula, and the list goes on and on and on. It is incredible the amount of stuff that Google thinks babies need! Okay, so maybe not Google - but the fact is - babies really don't need all of the stuff that the world seems to think they do.

Babycenter.com offers a baby cost calculator that estimates the one-time costs that most parents will have in preparing for their baby. The average total amount of these items is $2058. By adding a few luxury items the one-time costs rise to a staggering $3031! Sadly, this amount does not include ALL of the items that are suggested (or needed) by first time parents- things like a convertible car seat (used after baby reaches the 25-30 pound weight limit of the infant carseat/carrier), or a breast-pump- required of breastfeeding moms who return to work!

How are parents supposed to navigate these giant lists of things, the advice of well-meaning friends and family, and end up with enough to adequately care for baby without breaking the bank? It's actually quite simple. IGNORE all of it. This doesn't mean that parents should not prepare for the arrival of their baby or that there is anything wrong with accumulating things that will be required. But the trick is to accumulate things that YOU will require. Not that others require or suggest, and certainly not what major merchandisers so kindly suggest that you will need.

The best way to prepare for YOUR baby is to talk about how you plan to raise your baby. What parenting style will you use? What do you wish to teach your child? What kind of lifestyle do you want your baby to have? What expectations about things do you want to foster in your child?

If you intend to follow the guidelines of attachment parenting, you may want to forgo a crib and purchase a co-sleeper for your baby instead. If you want to keep your baby close to you to help her adjust to the world then you might choose a baby-wearing device such as a sling, wrap, or soft-structure carrier instead of a stroller.

If your family is concerned with saving money and reducing waste, perhaps cloth diapering- at least part time- is an option for you. Likewise, if you are concerned with using only organic, chemical-free, and other natural products for your baby you may consider exclusively breastfeeding and using cloth diapers full-time.

If you are concerned about raising a child who is overly preoccupied with (and over-stimulated by!) things and wish to foster creativity within your child rather than entertaining them with battery-powered toys, look around your home for items that are safe and practical for your baby to play with as he/she grows. There are very few parents who don't recall wiht humor at least one instance of their child cleaning out a kitchen cabinet full of pots and pans or plastic ware!

Beware of the temptation to buy all new things for your baby. Having some new things is lovely, however, having ALL new things is absolutely not necessary and does not contribute to your baby's well-being as much as happily involved parents do! And it's difficult to be happily involved if you are worried about money. Consider purchasing items second-hand at baby-themed consignment sales or stores, online through sites like Ebay, or from other moms you know (Don't know any moms? Attend a La Leche League meeting!) Even if money is a non-issue for you, consider purchasing some things second hand anyway- finding a good deal gives a great sense of accomplishment AND you'll be truly surprised at the exceptionally short amount of time your baby uses (or is interested in) some "necessary" items.

Following are a few items that we have not found useful or necessary and some of the items that we use instead. Some things we found we simply not useful at all.

Crib: Our daughter has not slept in it. Not even once. We use an Arms Reach co sleeper instead.

Stroller: Carrying baby leads to better attachment and bonding. We like to use an ErgoBaby or a ring-sling carrier like a Maya Wrap.

Infant Carseat: We did not purchase an infant carseat because convertible carseats are designed for babies from 5 pounds to between 45 - 80 pounds (depending on the brand and style) so they are useful much longer than the infant seat which only holds baby up to 25-30 pounds. The convertible carseat does not double as a baby carrier as the infant seat does but we prefer to carry/wear our baby. Before you purchase an infant seat, consider that it is possible for your baby to spend many hours in the seat without touch from another human. The convenience of these seats (home to car, car to stroller, stroller to restaurant car seat sling etc) can lead to your baby receiving much less touch from you than you may prefer or realize.

Baby Bath Towels: Regular bath towels work just fine. But they aren't quite as cute. ;)

Baby Bath Robe: We've never used this....and can't figure out in what circumstance it could be easier than dressing the baby...or why we would want her to be without a diaper after a warm bath anyway!

Boppy Seed Lounger: Our baby fit in this for about 15 minutes. Not worth the $30 investment!






One of the easiest (and hardest!) ways to stay out of the baby-stuff-trap is to wait until baby arrives to purchase things that will not be used right away. It's very easy (and fun!) to get caught up in buying cute baby gear, but parents might find later on that the $150 pack-n-play or a $160 baby swing weren't really as necessary- or as convenient- as they had hoped. Waiting to purchase things are they become necessary can result in substantial cost savings and can keep the accumulation of expensive baby things to a minimum.

Don't miss out on the enjoyable parts of preparing for the arrival of your baby. But don't get caught up in what the world thinks you need either. The best way for new parents to prepare for baby is to talk about how they want to raise their baby and how that effects the things they will need to be prepared for his or her arrival. These conversations and preparation go much further than a crib set toward helping baby to succeed in life; parents who agree on a parenting style are much more prepared than those who only agree on a nursery theme.

Go ahead and enjoy getting ready for your little one, but think about all of the cash you can free up to dump into a college fund if you can avoid the baby-stuff trap!

Babies and Stuffitis: The Marketing Campaign to Empty Your Wallet. Part 1

In the duration of my pregnancy I had the good fortune to only enter a Babies R' Us store on two occasions. Both of them were in the same week and happened only because the furniture stores in our area did not have a very good selection of glider-rocking chairs. My parents had very generously offered to purchase one for us as it had become kind of a tradition in our family with each of my sisters receiving a glider from my parents before the birth of her first child. It was a lovely gift and one that we have been able to use more than we ever imagined! My mom and I had a good time choosing the glider- and even more fun getting the manager to give us a good deal on the last display model of a discontinued color. All of that said, however, I do not plan to set foot in one of those God-forsaken places again.

The ridiculousness that is Babies R' Us (or insert any big-box-baby-superstore here) can barely be described. Wall-to-wall shelves and aisles crammed full of the latest and greatest in baby gear, baby wear, baby feeding, baby travel, baby furniture and every thing else. You name it and they probably have at least 10 different options of essentially the same thing. A quick search for "travel system" indicated almost 20 different options available in-store and a separate search on the mega-store's website returned over 70 options for "convertible carseats"! Incredible! The choices seem almost infinite and are utterly staggering.

And that is the problem with entering the baby years. It's mind boggling, completely overwhelming and can easily get out-of-control-expensive. Marketing techniques convince new parents that they "need" the latest technology and would be irresponsible to attempt parenthood without it. (Watch a commercial for just about any baby product and this subtext will probably jump out at you now if it didn't before.) Even Amazon is on board with the "needs" of babyhood. They recently posted their editors picks for "Newborn Essentials: 10 Products You Probably Didn't Know You Needed" which lists items like a "White Noise Machine", a "Moses Basket", and swaddle blankets along with a convincing blurb describing why new parents will absolutely require the item.

Many soon-to-be and new parents look to seasoned parents for advice on which items to register for and purchase, but most of us also observe and respond to social norms and trends regarding raising baby. That is how we ended up with a crib, crib bedding set, crib mattress, and TWO of those waterproof crib mattress pads that the Amazon editors indicate as positively necessary, and that we have NEVER used. And probably never will.

As we prepared for the arrival of our daughter we began to collect the things we thought would be necessary and to prepare a room for her. Compared to some we didn't really buy too much stuff. We were much less convinced than most that we would need every available baby item in order to be adequately prepared. We also opted not to learn our baby's sex ahead of time and to wait to make certain purchases until after the baby arrived.

Well, it turns out that most of the items we did buy were really NOT necessary. Even the crib. Especially the crib, in our case, actually. It's too bad that we spent so much money on it too, since when I eventually Craigslist it we probably won't get much of it back!

The guilt-ridden marketing toward soon-to-be parents is deceptive and dishonest, at best. While there are SOME things that are certainly necessary, they don't even begin to add up to the thousands of dollars in baby merchandise that marketers try to convince parents they will need to succeed in bringing-up baby. Parents would be better off to purchase a few small things to get started and determine what they really need as they raise their baby. That would definitely free up some cash to start a college fund for that same kiddo.

There are several short and long term complications caused by this very successful marketing scheme that go beyond the ridiculous surplus of stuff in American homes. The first and most obvious is a shortage of cash in the short term - cash that might otherwise be used to begin a college fund, or allow a parent (or both parents) to stay home with their baby for awhile longer before returning to work. This critical time with baby can especially effect breastfeeding success, parent-child bonding and attachment. Another issue may be a decrease in birthrates due to the perceived cost of raising infants. (Likewise, the cost may very well get out of hand because of the materialistic nature of our culture. But that is a topic for another time.) Requiring so much stuff for the arrival of and first year of baby's life is also setting a standard for the rest of the baby's childhood and maybe their entire lives. More and more stuff leads to "stuffitis" which can ultimately lead to poor priorities and poor checkbooks in adulthood. Maybe this seems like a stretch for some but take an honest look around and see if you still think it's untrue.

This doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with having some fun and frivolous things for your baby, or that there is anything wrong with being prepared with silly, pretty, or cool baby stuff. It just means that parents should consider the short and long term gains of the things they buy, if they can really afford them or if that money would be better spent on something else that is of more value to their baby (time, college tuition, etc). It means that parents should not buy into the commercials and advertisements laced with guilt directed at them for not having the newest and- almost always - outrageously expensive piece of baby equipment available.

It is important for parents to consider their parenting style and how they plan to raise their child as they prepare for baby's arrival. Conversations about these things are of much more value than stuff, and can lead to important, and possibly money saving revelations about which items are necessities and which items are more frivolous.

Next: Babies and Stuffitis: The Marketing Campaign to Empty Your Wallet. Part 2 - Ignoring the Force-Fed Guilt to Determine What You Need!

The Simple(r) Life: Not Just For Paris?

A few months ago I read a story in Mothering magazine about a woman who converted a 40 foot long Blue Bird bus into a home for herself, her husband, and three daughters, aged seven years and younger. Their desire to live simply and eliminate debt from their lives led her to the decision to park the bus on a piece of property owned by a relative, complete a moderate renovation and move her family in. Their family's lifestyle became one of simplicity, careful consideration of resources, and cooking entire meals in only one pot using as much whole food as possible. My reaction to the article was a strange combination of shock, horror, respect, curiosity, and realization that perhaps there are other ways to live outside of rampant consumerism and the proverbial rat race.

Although I have always considered myself to be frugal in many areas of life and I am certainly a self proclaimed disciple of Amy Dacyczyn, author of The Tightwad Gazette, I have not really been as frugal as I could be. This is at least partially due to spending the last several years enjoying two incomes- sometimes frugality is the result of necessity as much as anything else.

Last fall, anticipating a change in our living situation and a transition to a single-income household, my husband and I participated in Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University. Although we were familiar with many of Ramsey's concepts, the class gave us the opportunity to begin practicing the methods that will allow us to ultimately live debt-free. Ramsey's famous adage "Normal is broke be weird!" struck a proverbial chord with us and has allowed us to see how encumbered we had become by things and the stuff we were keeping around the house, and without realizing, had fallen into the habit of regularly accumulating more of.

We followed Ramsey's advice and began to sell off the "junk" we weren't using. Utilizing websites like Craigslist we listed (slowly at first) things that we had not used in the last 3 years...followed by things we hadn't used or looked at in 2 years....and as the stuff rolled out and the cash rolled in, our momentum increased and we accomplished an extensive liquidation of "stuff". In all fairness, I must admit my tendency to get carried away with projects like this and although my husband has had to reign me in a time or two (but the baby doesn't REALLY need her crib-she can sleep in the pack n play!) for the most part our purge has been pretty reasonable. We parted with old gaming systems, books, clothes, furniture we weren't using and were keeping "just in case" (in case of what, we have no idea, of course).

The benefits of this project have been pretty awesome and even a little bit surprising. We found space in our house that we didn't realize was there because it had been so crammed with stuff, accumulated a big chunk of cash, unloaded "things" that at some point we thought couldn't be lived without, and have gained an (odd) sense of fulfillment by dumping the "junk"!

Life and financial situations can be especially troubling when headlines abound with stories about the United States' consumer bust and what happens if the government can't agree on how to handle our tax dollars. In a world obsessed with owning things, in which the quality of one's life is judged by the ability to accumulate things and the way we are perceived by others is largely influenced by our possessions, it can be difficult to recognize how quickly objects and our pursuit of them, can encumber our happiness. Although I am not an advocate of a miserly existence or one that does not allow for some comforts and modern conveniences- I want new living room furniture as much as the next person!- I think that evaluating our want versus need scenario can do a great deal for our sense of satisfaction in life and help us feel at ease in a world of perpetual financial unrest.

Until rather recently, I have never really considered the uncluttered and simpler way of life that is part of modern-day minimalist living as something that was even remotely feasible for my family. And I'm not sure I can entirely embrace it now- but I know for certain that the Blue Bird bus family inspired me to re-evaluate what is really important for my family. With some help from Dave Ramsey, a sense of humor, and a huge amount of determination, our family is determined to live a less-cluttered and more fulfilling lifestyle.

“Our life is frittered away by detail ... simplify, simplify.”

Henry David Thoreau

No, No, No! It's Still About the Pages!

This weekend an opinion piece in the New York Times criticized modern book lovers for their attachment to books. Not the attachment to reading books, but rather the attachment to the physical objects and their aversion to the digitizing of centuries worth of published papers, records, and written items belonging to the famous, the brilliant, the rich, but mainly, the dead. (And largely the long dead.)

The author, James Gleick, begins by sharing a memory of the opportunity he had to personally examine the papers of Sir Isaac Newton. He describes the experience of touching and closely examining the very pages upon which Newton wrote his notes and ideas. Gleick relates to historians as he describes "the exhilaration that comes from handling the venerable original. It’s a contact high." He indicates that there was a distinct difference in physically examining the original papers rather than only the microfilm version. He notes specifically that he would never have known the diminutive and precise penmanship of Newton from the microfilm or that Newton began his text at both ends of his notebooks and worked toward the center.

After sharing this memory, which is sure to warm the hearts of readers, researchers, and historians, he halts abruptly and begins to chastise those who believe that these types of opportunities are nearing extinction because of projects that seek to make historic documents digital and available to anyone. He indicates that a recent project launched by Google and the British Library that will "digitize 40 million pages of books, pamphlets and periodicals dating to the French Revolution" and many similar projects, including one that recently that digitized a Bulgarian document dating from 1221 and the Swedish Rok runestone, which predates Leif Ericson, have provoked mixed feelings.

He argues that those who see this technological advancement as an affront to the art of research are simply caught up in the romance of touching or being near something hundred of years old. He indicates that while some believe that this technology devalues their own work and makes incredible and surprising discoveries impossible, he believes that online research can offer the same amount of "unexpected twists and turns of research" as traditional archival research.

Gleick asserts that opposition to this digitization is simply the notion that "what one loves about books is the grain of paper and the scent of glue." He charges the opponents to this progress with "sentimentalism" and "fetishization", faulting them for their love of the physical presence of books, manuscripts, and historic documents.

Although the piece is convincing enough, there is an incontrovertible difference between online research and digging through musty old papers. There is a difference between electronic words and the printed page. Although I own a Kindle (lovingly given to me by my husband two Christmases ago) and appreciate it for its convenience, especially while traveling, I have downloaded very few digital books (and those have been mostly free). When I want to read, I don't automatically grab my Kindle. I search through the shelves of books in my office (lovingly built by my husband) and search for one that I can pick up, hold on to, turn the pages, and inhale the faint scent of "book" from. When I want to do scholarly research, study, or work without interruption, my first choice of venue is not in front of a monitor, it is the library archives or my own office, surrounded by books that I love within arms reach.

Although I agree with Gleick that digitization of articles is an advancement in scholarship and will make some types of research simpler and more cost effective, I do not agree that it is going to allow for more amazing discoveries than non-digital research. I think that those who genuinely enjoy research and digging through piles of dusty papers and books, those who enjoy turning the pages and closely observing the intricacies of the pages and penmanship, are who will make discoveries in ancient works. Their zeal and zest cannot be matched by the online researcher and that is what will make the difference.

"I cannot live without books."
— Thomas Jefferson

Banning the Babies: Are Kiddos Going Out of Fashion?

Almost three weeks ago Malaysia Airlines announced that they have banned infants in first class on all of their Boeing 747-400 jets and intends to do the same for other flights as well. People all over the world have voiced their opinions ranging from relief and elation to outrage and chagrin.

Two similar stories highlighting an attitude of inconvenience toward children have made their way into the news just this week. Near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania a restaurant has banned all children under six years old due to complaints from retirement-age patrons that children were causing a "ruckus". ABC News reported that the establishment's owner announced to patrons that his restaurant was "not a place for young children" and customers had been disturbed during their meals "many, many times" by these kiddos.

The second story involves one mother's office dilemma. New York Times contributing writer Lisa Belkin shared a letter in which a mother described conflict in her workplace due to her breast pump. (Yes, her breast pump!) This mom stores her breast pump in a discreet black bag under her desk when she is not using it in the space allotted for pumping by her company. Her office mate happened to see a few empty bottles in the partially open bag under the desk one day and immediately filed an HR complaint. (This mom also notes that complaints were made when she stored the bag in the designated nursing area.)

These stories are disconcerting because they represent an attitude of inconvenience and annoyance toward children. I will admit that I have often felt annoyed by a screaming child at dinner or during travel, but I have not wished them to be banned. And I don't think most people do. At least, I hope not. Most people who have children are empathic to parents attempting to comfort an upset child. In my pre-motherhood years I often wondered why those parents didn't take their child home and put them to bed. Now I know that sometimes parents want to get out of the house too! Additionally, allowing children to accompany their parents on outings and social occasions teaches them appropriate behavior and how to conduct themselves in particular social settings.

When people fail to recognize the value of children, which includes acknowledging and respecting their needs, they are doing themselves and the children who need their patience and understanding a terrible injustice. There is inarguable evidence that breast milk is THE best nutrition for babies. Breastfeeding is the best way to give children the best possible start in life. It is troubling to think that there are those who are more concerned with how breastfeeding (and pumping, by extension) makes them feel than the invaluable nutrition it provides to babies.

The banning incidents also indicate that there is likely a problem in our society in addition to a lacking sense of empathy. Although children have been unruly, loud, and inconsolable at enormously inopportune moments since the beginning of time, perhaps today's parents are too passive in their response to these behaviors. I've noticed parents ignoring their toddler's screams in a restaurant and carrying on conversation as usual more often than I'd like to think about. I wonder on how many of those occasions the kiddo could have been soothed with a little bit of attention from his or her parents rather than left to entertain themselves.

The real questions these incidents raise are probably more disheartening than the events themselves:
Are infants and small children going out of fashion? Would people prefer not to be bothered with seeing or hearing them?
Or is our society becoming less and less tolerant of kiddos and there sometimes (and sometimes often!) unruly behavior?
Are parents and lacking discipline to blame for the bans against babies and small tots?
Are there really people who are not concerned with the general health and well being of the next generation?

A change in attitude toward infants, small children, and their needs will require a great deal of patience and understanding. People would do well to heed the words of a very wise man:

"A person's a person, no matter how small."

— Dr. Seuss (Horton Hears a Who!)

NEWS FLASH: Sex is For the Bedroom ONLY!

Recently an opinion piece appeared on the New York Times Sunday Review Opinion Pages asserting that today's generation of young women and mothers find sex to be passé and basically revolting. The author, Erica Jong, argues that the mothers who made the feminist revolution in the United States failed to pass along the ideals of feminism and free sex to their daughters, resulting in a generation that finds sexual satisfaction less and less motivating. Additionally, she argues that our culture shows "signs that sex has lost its frisson of freedom", possibly because sex and rampant sexuality are no longer restricted or taboo. The author also argues that young women today shun sex and sexuality and hold a "nostalgia for ’50s-era attitudes toward sexuality" and that young female writers are "obsessed with motherhood and monogamy" rather than sex.

Jong alleges that young women today find sex dangerous (which, coincidentally, seems to be in sharp contrast to her previous assertion that sex and passion are more desirable when forbidden). Rather than embrace their sexuality regardless of the consequences as a few women in a rather trashy (but wonderful) HBO sitcom-gone-cinema series did, today's young women refrain from sex, passion, and intimacy for a safer, sexless lifestyle (or at least a lifestyle of less passion).

Jong's worst offense in this piece though is her brazen statement that categorizes today's generation of young mom's as anti-sex and unwilling to be near their partners, let alone have sex with them. Her sweeping statement alleges that women would prefer to sleep with their children and turn their backs on their men as well as "wear one’s baby in a man-distancing sling and breast-feed at all hours so your mate knows your breasts don’t belong to him."

There are a few problems with her statement. First of all, Jong wrongly assumes that the bedroom is the only place for sex! Such thinking is quite archaic and really only points to her own disconnection with the younger generation she chastises in this piece. I'm pretty sure co-sleeping parents are utilizing other spaces in their homes for sex! I, for one, am proud to wear a t-shirt emblazoned with the phrase "co sleepers do it in the kitchen" - much to the dismay of my family.

Additionally, I can name at least a dozen places that are MUCH more fun for sex than the boring old bedroom! Seriously, who can't?

The author's comment regarding baby-wearing and breastfeeding only adds to the already significant evidence of her disconnect with women, families, and a generation younger than her. It's particularly interesting that she notes her idea that breastfeeding "at all hours" (baby-led breastfeeding) sends a message to one's mate that "(your) breasts don’t belong to him." It is particularly fascinating that an ardent feminist such as Jong would consider breasts something that should "belong" to one's mate. Ponder that for awhile.

Jong's statements were really nothing less than a vilification of a parenting style that she, in addition to the concept of sex outside of the bedroom, clearly does not understand. Her comments have little to do with sex and certainly very little relevance to this generation. It is unfortunate that she has used her celebrity and status to berate young parents, and especially young moms, since she seems to have very little knowledge of the parenting styles she tries to reprimand. Perhaps Jong should focus her future opinion pieces on something she has a little bit more knowledge about or, at the very least, enough connection with to adequately compose a few pertinent thoughts.