Why we won’t be “voting” tomorrow on Super Tuesday
February 4, 2008
This is a moderate household - both GeekDaddy and I are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - we agree on most issues. But in the end, he leans just a tad more to the left and I to the right. So I’m the registered Republican while he’s the registered Democrat of the household.
It works for us.
That said, tomorrow is Super Tuesday and it’s the first time that Colorado has been in on the process this early. Along with 24 other states, we are trying to decide which candidate will represent our party - or at least get our delegates votes when the official party Convention happens.
Here’s the thing - rather than “voting” - both Colorado’s Republicans and Democrats have opted to go the precinct caucus route. That means, in briefest of terms, that neighbors get together and cast their votes. For the Republicans, it’s a one-person, one ‘preference’ vote thing. Show up, sign in, wait for a bunch of hoop jumping, cast your vote, and leave. For the Democrats, it’s unfortunately a bit more involved and multiple votes can be taken as well as delegates being named.
This, of course, takes place a 7 p.m. in two very separate locations.
So - our options become to try and get a last minute babysitter (ain’t gonna happen) - who of course isn’t someone of voting age themselves - so that we can each participate, or to decide which one is “more important” so that one of us can go and the other can stay home with our child. Honestly? We don’t believe that either one of us has “more important” beliefs than the other.
This is ridiculous. But more than that, it’s probably not all that uncommon. Even in cases where the parents are both in the same party - limiting this decision-making process to a specific time & place causes people to have to face the decision of who gets to go participate in the decision and who gets left out of the process.
There’s a reason that polls are left open all day long on the day of normal voting - it’s so that we can find a way to get there and be heard. This archaic form of precinct caucuses is a relic from a time when men voted and women didn’t. And it’s high time that our politics started reflecting the modern world.
Instead - we’ll just have to hope that our “neighbors” find a way to resolve this issue in their own households… or that those without children do a good job of deciding for us.
Still, I’m generally disgusted with the stupidity of the party representatives on both sides who saw fit to make the participation of their “neighbors” so complicated as to make it unlikely for most.
Makes you wonder if they can’t get it right for the average citizen at this level, how are they expected to get it right at higher levels…
The “Right” Number of Kids
February 4, 2008
I have one daughter. One. She was planned. She was planned as an ‘only child.’
This shouldn’t be an issue… but surprisingly, it often is.
About the only parents who don’t experience the strange social phenomena of the “right” number of children are those who are happily married, financially well-off, and have one boy and one girl spaced somewhere between 1 1/2 and 3 years apart in age.
This is, apparently, the American concept of the ‘ideal’ family.
I have many friends who are Childfree. If you’re not familiar with the term, let me give you the reader’s digest version - they aren’t ‘childless’ because that implies that something is missing that is wanted. They have actively chosen not to have children because they don’t wish to be parents. Some of them can’t stand children - some of them have no issues with children, but just don’t want to parent for one of many reasons.
The response they usually get to letting someone know that they are Childfree is along the lines of “oh you’ll change your mind later” or “you’ll wish you had changed your mind when you’re older” or “you’re just saying that because you haven’t had a child yet” to somewhat more attacking and rude comments.
I have a friend with 5 children ranging in age between 9 and 21. All were wanted and planned. She has faced the slings and barbs of many a grocery-store wit saying things like “they know what causes that now” and “haven’t you ever heard of birth control?”
One of my mommy friends has 4 girls. On both pregnancies 3 and 4, she was consistently asked things like “oh, going for the boy you didn’t get before?” as if somehow, the number of children they wanted was solely dependent on having at least one of each gender.
Recently, a couple who are friends of ours, whose daughter is Buttercup’s age and son is around 15 months, let us know that they were expecting again in July. Somehow, I already knew she was pregnant before she was showing… so I won a bet with GeekDaddy that she was - and our hearty congratulations were met with wistful sighs of relief. Apparently, we were the first people they had told outside of family - because their families’ responses were all horror and shock. The phrase “but you already have one of each” actually came out of one parent’s mouth. They were actually afraid to tell anyone else because they wanted positive reactions, not criticism.
Where did this belief come from that there is a “right” number and gender type with regard to American children in a single family?
I’m not sure of it - but it’s one of those ‘unwritten’ rules that seem to pervade our society. Even when those holding the belief come from families that don’t reflect that at all.
The thing is? The “right” number of kids is different for each family - from none, to one, to two, to a dozen - there’s no such thing as a “right” number, unless you mean, “right for us.”
Okay, I’ll get off my soapbox now… it’s just one of those pet peeves that comes up all the time. We’ll never be the “2 kids, one boy, one girl” family - but I can’t imagine our family any other way than it is.
Can you?
or Subscribe by Email!!
