On the Changes Children Bring

I've been thinking a lot lately about how much children change your life. I had a dream the other night that I lost one of my children and it's difficult to describe the panic that I felt. Sometimes a picture of my son makes me think, well, it makes me think terrible and touching things.

Anyhow, what I would liek to do is demistify some of these changes for people without children, or even for people with children. There are some amazing changes that come with children, not without meaning.

When the kids came, I wasn't overwhelmed. I was talking to my accountant, and he described his feelings on the day of his daughter's birth as 'a rush'. I didn't feel any rush. Due to complications, my wife was scheduled for a c-section about three months before the birth. We showed up at the hospital without any of the prototypical drama associated with births - it was like showing up for a normally scheduled appointment, which it was in fact. Once we were in the hospital, the attitude of the staff was so efficient and professional that worrying actually seemed out of place. I was worried about my wife, of course, but it was so far out of my control that I felt almost like I was getting in the way. They pulled each of my children out; my son silent and my daughter screaming, each covered with associated detritus and quickly spirited away by an overweight nurse to another room where they were... well, I have no idea what they did in the other room. I had no desire to cut anything, although I was very interested in looking, which they did not let me do. I was told to sit down when I tried to peak over the curtain.

So later I was in a room with my wife, who was a little out of it due to the anasthesia, and my new children. The nurses, as they were throughout our stay, were helpful, senstitive, and on the spot. They seemed the most comfortable with the situation. I was kind of dumbfounded. I had been around kids for years, having five nephews and nieces by this time. I had been there. There was no rush, just completion. I was happy, but it was hardly unexpected that two children would appear. We had been to ultrasounds every month, we had talked about it almost constantly, we had planned, moved, and prepared for eight months. I was not shocked, nor was my wife (as far as I could tell).

We brought them home - to their home, where they would live. That was a moment, but again, not unexpected. I read somewhere that what makes a family exceptional is that children intuitively understand that they are unconditionally accepted at home. My house would be the place where they would be received, always, forever. Like I said, it was a moment.

Up to now, and for the next few months, the only emotion elicited by the kids was exhaustion - if that's a feeling. They were lots of work. I posted to Facebook at one point saying "I think I have this parenting thing figured out." What I meant was that it was just a lot of work and you have to keep working and hope your wife keeps supporting you. It was twins, and let me tell you, it's a lot of work with twins. But there was no whopping emotional feeling associated with caring for them. It was just work.

One thing I noticed during this time was how much less I was thinking of myself. Many of the neuroses associated with the late teens and twenties I now attribute to having too much time and energy. Getting four hours of sleep a night for weeks on end, with a night off, then for weeks more, takes it outtaya. I was wishing that I was back in my twenties, with all of the associated youthful energy. One of the guys in our Multiples Birthing Class was 55 and having triplets. For goodness sake, I'm glad I wasn't him. In any case, you wanna stop thinking of yourself, have some kids. Or don't, I guess there's lots of people out there that are still crazy with kids. But I found it to expend a lot of energy leaving me with little time to think too much about myself.

So now I think about who I would kill if something should happen to my kids and panic in dreams about losing them. It kind of snuck up on me. I don't know if I'm just dense, or what. Probably dense. But here I am, crazy about my kids and thinking about them often. Which isnt' so bad - it's another way to take the focus off myself, where it doesn't need to be.

On Women and Politics

A progressive friend of mine who is a computer programmer once remarked that he sometimes felt like cultural mores were like pieces of code created by another programmer that he stumbled across while performing edits. They sometimes appeared useless, but he was hesitant to delete them for fear that they were performing some essential function in the program. I love this analogy, and I think it is apt.

I bring this analogy up in this space, again, as it pertains to a topic that is on my mind a lot lately: women's suffrage. Believe it or not, there was a day and age in which the idea of women voting was thought ludicrous by both men and women. And it wasn't that long ago. A personal hero of mine, G.K. Chesterton, was distinctly opposed to women's suffrage. Of course, expressing this view now is enough to get you locked up in a sanitorium, or at least enough to get you ruefully ignored. Come to think of it, if you promoted the idea that women should not have the vote in a place like Northampton, MA, then I think you would have a very long day.

Here's what I'm noticing: women are naturally more sympathetic than men, and tend towards leftist politics. They desire security above all else, and are naturally unwilling to be hard on those in naturally difficult circumstances. I suspect, and this is not a comprehensive analysis of the situation, that our drift to the left politically is directly aligned with women's suffrage. And I also highly doubt that abortion will ever be illegal in a republic with women's suffrage.

Chesterton's difficulty with women's suffrage was that it created a division within the household. In the operation of the household, it was necessary to have a unity of action and sentiment. Men and women were forced to work together to a common end, and this was a good thing. Hopefully, a man's decisions were tempered by his wife's feelings and sympathy, and vice versa, her sentiments were tempered by his practicality and desire for action.

What we have now is a society where the sympathetic sentiment and practicality are sundered. There is no longer unity of action.

I think that this is the root of the 'politically correct' culture that we now currently live and breathe. There is this air of division, and in some places being 'masculine' is an exercise in cultural revolution. A witness to this is the Dodge Charger advertisement during the Super Bowl which trumpeted the car as "Man's Last Stand". Men feel cornered, but they also feel that acting like 'themselves' is somehow an act of violence. Men are not allowed to be men.

I believe this has a larger effect on the culture, and its impact is especially felt in the collapse of Fatherhood in the United States.

The solution? That's a subject for another post.

Movie Review: The Hurt Locker

So, I had The Hurt Locker on my Netflix list and then my neighbor foisted a stolen copy upon me. I felt bad - I didn't want to make a fuss with my neighbor about the illegal copy.

Anyways, I was looking forward to seeing the movie. There was a lot of buzz. For example, a reviewer on the DVD box called it "one of the defining movies of the decade". Hey, now, you don't hear that very often.

In broad strokes, the movie is about a team of soldiers in Iraq in 2004 whose job is to defuse Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). It's obviously a high-stress job. The movie, in part, is about the dichotomy between the daily adreneline rush active duty soldiers experience and the monotony of civilian life when they are not deployed. More on that later.

The movie is a very good (it seems) depiction of the life of our soldiers in Iraq. It is interesting to me that so few of this type of movie have been made. It seems that most Iraq War movies are intended only to disparage either our government (c.f. George W. Bush) or, what's much worse, our soldiers. This movie doesn't put our soldiers on a pedastal, but nor does it tarnish their much deserved reputation for bravery and service.

I'd be interested to hear a veteran's opinion of the authenticity of the movie's depiction of life for our soldiers in Iraq.

I'm not sure how much of a cohesive 'theme' this movie has. I think, in large part, it is just asking you to experience the daily life of these men and to have some sympathy for what their service does to them mentally - especially in the near-daily brushes with death and violence. It's a worthy message.

An unfortunate, and neither unexpected nor unrealistic, element of the movie is the contrast between the 'excitement' of active military duty and the 'boredom' of civilian life. Of course, it's more than just 'excitement' and 'boredom'. Soldiers of every nation go through something that can't really be related to anything in civilian life. Living your life under contstant threat of a violent death does something to you. On the other hand, it is also true that ordinary life is too often identified with a boring life. Ordinary life is not boring.

Upon reflection, the movie may tell this story, too. Sometimes it's easier to face an IED than your wife. Courage comes in many forms, and is just as necessary in the ordinary events of life as it is in the extraordinary.

On the Myth of "Choice"

So, in case you haven't heard, Focus on the Family has paid 2.5 million dollars for a spot during the Super Bowl that will tell the story of Pamela Tebow, who was encouraged to have a surgical abortion on account of pregnancy complications 23 years ago. She declined, and as a result we have Tim Tebow, Heisman Trophy winning quarterback for the University of Florida.

Pro-abortion advocates are, predictably, in a kerfuffle. Most are objecting on the grounds that broadcast groups have agreed to avoid advertising related to 'controversial issues'. Others insist that airing controversial material during the Super Bowl will somehow ruin the 'universal spirit' of the event.

There is an irony here that absolutely punctures the myth of 'Choice' with which these groups nearly always wrap themselves. The point is this: the ad is only about Ms. Tebow's choice. From all reports, it is not an idealogical attack on any political or social reality. It's only about one woman's "Choice". And the response of so-called "Pro-Choice" groups like NARAL and NOW is to seek to censor Ms. Tebow's story.

This is why many in the Pro-Life movement, including myself, find it more accurate to refer to these groups as "Pro-Abortion".

NARAL and NOW are free to run ads of their own, describing alternative choices. I have a feeling that they won't be as popular. Perhaps the time has come to bring the stories out into the open - they will be compelling. And I think it is the knowledge of how each 'choice' appears in context that scares the crap out of pro-aborts.

Go Saints.

On Partisanship and Politics

I watched the whole State of the Union Address last night - all 80 minutes of it. Here’s my thoughts:

• It seemed really jocular. There were tons of laughs - and a lot of it was genuinely funny. But, really, time and a place. I haven’t watched a ton of these things, but it seemed kind of yukky to me, in the sense of yukking it on up.
• He said some good stuff. I liked what he said about nuclear power plants. He threw in some stuff on American ingenuity and breaks for small business. He seemed to be really trying to reach out to the folks who shlocked it to him in Massachusetts last week. Hey, we can work this out, you know?
• Some stuff I really didn’t like. When he kept crabbin’ about Republicans not playing nice, it seemed like total BS to me. It’s pretty clear to everyone that Barry O. has been trying to push through a far-left agenda, abetted by majorities in the House and Senate. What have Republicans had to go along with? Barry O.’s been acting like he didn’t need the Repubs for a while now, and then he starts talkin’ like the Republicans are some sticks in the mud for not going along. It’s like bitchin’ about somebody not coming to a party to which they weren’t invited.
• I didn’t, at all, like the comment directed at the Supreme Court. You don’t like what the Supreme Court does? Tough shit. Even if nobody believes that the Supreme Court is above politics, they still are and should be treated as such. No president should ever go where he went last night in his comments about the court. Ever. Seriously, it’s inviting anarchy to even insinuate that the President may be questioning the Court’s decision in a case.

In the end, it was clear that there really wasn’t any more information to be gathered from the speech. Barry’s playing like he’s chastened, but he’s like a bad basketball player giving a pass fake. It’s nothin’. He’s still cocky, but he doesn’t know that someone just stole his ball and is driving down to his hoop.

So what does this have to do with religion and culture? I don’t know. I don’t think that larger government is good for American culture. I think it’s the road to whatever the opposite of culture is: homogeneity, institutionality, dependence. It’s bad, it’s bad.

Wow, that all sounds really partisan. Am I a partisan? It seems like it’s hard to really be in the middle nowadays. What do you think?

St. Josemaria talks about appreciating where people like President Obama are coming from: there’s plenty of injustice in the world and it’s a good thing to be discontented with it. But I guess there it is - I can appreciate it, but I still find it a bad approach. Barack Obama scares me a bit. He’s not moderate, and nor are his policies or approaches. I don’t like it...

On Local Culture

For a while now, the theme of 'Local Culture' has been in the front of my mind. My previous post alludes to the idea that the solution to 'life' issues is changing the culture before (or along with) changing the law.

Here's a little story:

About 150 years ago America was a white-bread, Protestant society - largely Anglo-Saxon in demographics and culture. Certainly all of the people that 'mattered' were WASPs. They passed the laws, they owned the newspapers, they were the leaders of industry, etc. They 'formed' the culture.

About 100 years ago, an amalgam of European immigrants started pouring into the country. These people were invited to our shores to man the machines of industry owned by the existing Anglo-Saxon power brokers. At that time, many asked 'How will all these immigrants assimilate into our culture?' The answer was 'We don't know, but to grow as a nation we need these people. Otherwise we will be left behind.'

So millions of immigrants, mostly but not exclusively European, poured into the United States. Germans, Irish, Italians, Poles, French Canadians, and others set up cultural enclaves mostly in urban areas. The political, and cultural, clout of these enclaves was very limited in the larger community. These enclaves were insular, at least by modern standards. A friend once told me that when his French Canadian father, back in the 50s, wanted to marry an Irish girl his parents opposed the marriage saying, "Where will you go to Church?" Both families were Catholic, but participated in segregated French and Irish parishes.

So, until about 50 years ago there were these separate cultural enclaves - Anglo-Saxon Protestants pulling the levers of power and others manning the machines of industry. What both enclaves had in common was an ethnic identity stretching back hundreds of years, if not more. Not that they had a common ethnic identity, but their separate identities were all, more or less, old.

This shared ethnic identity created a cohesion and identity amongst these groups. It was the mechanism by which Faith was nurtured in these separate communities, in separate ways. These different cultures were also a deposit of cultural wisdom and 'rules' for living that helped individuals navigate the sometimes roiling seas of life. In a way, these groups were even a social service provider for themselves, either in the form of religious fraternities or beneficent organizations.

Fifty years ago, the dams of these little enclaves began to burst - little Italian girls started to marry little WASP boys, or any of a thousand variations on these themes. These little girls and boys didn't quite understand why it mattered very much, but it really changed everything. An example: My great-grandfather ran an Italian bank in the early twentieth century. The sign over his bank read 'Italian Banker'. He could do that because it meant something to people that he was Italian - it made them want to do business with him. As these dams broke, this meant less.

As the ethnic cultural environments began to fade, a vacuum was created. Some of the elements filling this vacuum were new human developments in and of themselves. Television replaced 'visiting' as the primary form of entertainment. Government became larger and took over some 'social welfare' needs. Business was transacted less on relationship, and was based more and more on short-term profit/loss calculations. Big business arose, and small family businesses declined.

Other things were lost. Families were exposed to new challenges. Extended family networks broke down, having in the past been sustained by traditional cultural understandings of marriage, as well as by family members willing to assist in child rearing. Women went to work, creating a dual strain on themselves as 'provider' and 'nurturer'. In fact, the sexual revolution had numerous impacts on the family. The family became smaller, divorce became more common, and children were sexualized at a much younger age. Things got a little rough.

In all of these developments, individuals were hurt by the lack of a larger social support system. This social support system was often nurtured by a common cultural framework, based on some type of 'local' identity, that is no longer there.

So, what is the point of that giant story? Just this: that I think we'd all be a little, or a lot, better off if we had more of a common cultural identity. That's not terribly controversial, but I wonder if people really think that way. Is anyone trying to create a local culture, consciously? Does anyone think that being 'American' or a 'Massachutan' is something special? Is there anything that sweeps all of us up, into a common cultural bin? Right now, I don't think that there is. But there should be.

How to? Another post.

On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Today is the 38th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that struck down state laws prohibiting abortion during the first and second trimester of pregnancy. I would like to offer a few recommendations, mostly for men, towards building a culture of life.

1. Be a man. All of my recommendations relate to this theme, but it is important to keep this principle at the forefront. It seems that many attacks on pro-abortion policies either are, or can be perceived as, anti-woman. We need to accept the principle that men are born to be leaders, and if this is the case then abortion is more than 50% our fault. We need to go after men for not being men, and be men ourselves.
2. Bind yourself. Get married, or make some other lifetime commitment of service, and live it out. Don't wait until your in your mid-thirties. This is a mistake. All of the energy and life that people in their twenties possess is meant to be directed towards a family (or some other difficult end). A lot of the difficulties that people in these age groups face are a result of excess energy that is supposed to be turned towards children that gets turned inward and makes us fret about ourselves.
3. Be a good husband, father, or priest. However you choose to bind yourself, do it well and never stop. Tell yourself that it is forever and learn to love it. Never, ever, let up. There is so much work involved in being married. It can be scary. A friend told me that one of the most courageous decisions a man can make is to get married. He was right. The next most courageous is having kids.
4. Put away the porn, now. If you're invovled in any way with pornography, you are hurting women. Being chaste is extremely challenging, and I'm not judging anyone for falling. But if you want to help build a culture of life, confess your faults to God and move on. Now.

The common thread in all of this is courage. Being a good husband, father, brother, or friend is very hard work. One person can make a difference. If enough of us do these things, abortion would be a non-issue. I'm not speaking against lobbying the government, but it's a joke unless we're laying the cultural foundation.

In the immortal words of St. Josemaria Escriva, "Esto vir!" Be a Man!