That's more like it, Nyquil

Since I've beaten up on Huggies for their sexist advertising in the past, I feel responsible to cheer Nyquil for making a gender-neutral parenting commercial.  Actually, it kind of plays on an expectation that men work in offices.  The way the beginning is shot, we're supposed to believe this guy is telling his boss he's sick.  Then we get a little surprise when it reveals to whom he's really talking.

  It's not amazing.  It's not rocket science.  It just chooses to portray a father as a vital parent instead of a mother.  We need more like this.

Huggies Dad vs. G.I. Jane

Although I've noodled on the subject a fair amount, I only this week had an epiphany about the dumb dad stereotype this blog seeks to combat.  Call me slow on the uptake, but what finally occurred to me may explain - at least in part - why one vein of sexist advertising continues to be tolerated.  I detail one side of the coin in my "Why Competent Parent?" sidebar mini-manifesto - that coming off as incompetent allows men to punt family responsibility.  My epiphany, on the other side of the coin: men in the domestic sphere threaten some people's conception of how the world works and what kinds of people should get which opportunities.  Fathers taking responsibility for their kids and their homes aren't as rare as we once were, but we're still pioneers.  If this choice seems novel in a good way to many, it also seems novel in a threatening way to others.  Lampooning the at-home father may be a defense mechanism for the threatened.

I've pointed out before in this space the Huggies ads with implicit or explicit themes of

dad as doofus, father as fool.  These ads gain context in relation to how the culture has treated women who have pioneered in traditionally male fields over the years.  Those fictional female characters seemed similarly threatening to those who took comfort in the status quo.  The type reached its apotheosis in Demi Moore's star crewcut turn in 1997's G.I. Jane.  Herein, Moore fights her way into the few and the proud sixteen years before the military allowed women to take combat assignments.  My research revealed that in my memory, I'd actually melded G.I. Jane with (childhood crush) Nancy McKeon's (pun-not-rejected) trailblazing role in 1986's television movie Firefighter.  If we're

establishing a Hollywood lineage here, we should probably wind back the clock at least to Yentl in 1983.  (Side note: apparently one must be a brunette to face this challenge.)  Whether it's Semper Fi or the fire house or religious training in the shtetl, when women invade male domains, they have to endure hazing.  I confess that I haven't seen Firefighter or G.I. Jane, and it's been a long time since I saw Yentl (wherein the lads didn't know she was a she), but the hazing clearly attempts to convince the pioneering woman that she's not strong enough for the challenge.  In fact, she doesn't belong because she's not strong enough.  Cue the stirring music at the end, though, and fit that lady for a uniform.  She proved everybody wrong. 

Which brings me back to what unsettles me about the dad-can't-handle-the-home-front subtext of advertisements: that they don't come around to an ending.  The Huggies dad stereotype tends to focus on a stage at which all new parents feel inadequate to the task: parenting babies.  As Dan Savage has told all the gay kids, it gets better.  We don't see that process most of the time when dads get lampooned.  I've gotten to the third paragraph of this post without mentioning the at-home-dad cultural artifact kryptonite that is Mr. Mom.  Well, there.  I've said it.  The parallels in the titles of Mr. Mom and G.I. Jane are quite striking.  Observers can only see the pioneer through the lens of the person who traditionally holds the role - G.I. Joe at war and, of course, mom in the house.  Everyone associates Mr. Mom with the beginning where (dark-brown-haired) Michael Keaton is utterly incompetent at his new job.  In fact, it can be rightly credited with starting the whole battle that at-home dads still have to fight about how incapable we are of actually running a household.  Of course, the Mr. in this case only becomes a stay-at-home dad because he loses his job, and his wife finds one before he does.  Not exactly a profile in courage.  The narrative eventually arrives, however, at a place where Michael Keaton gets better at running the house and he and Teri Garr do what many professional couples have done in the 31 years since: they both return to work, having negotiated new deals with their old bosses.

Dads get hazed as incompetent the way Demi and Nancy got hazed as weak.  I remember that in high school when I wanted to start doing laundry, I had to lobby my mother hard to get her to teach me the basics.  Why?  Maybe because she'd controlled the laundry room for decades and had her system down.  Maybe she didn't want someone who might make clothing-ruining mistakes to mess up one of her domains.  Just like the firefighters and Marines, power and trust were at issue.  She eventually relented, and I'm a careful-if-not-perfect home launderer.

The fact of the matter is that I'm better at running point on our household and our kids than I was when I went part time six years ago.  I can balance giving attention to the kids and the house better now.  I've always tried to put dinner on the table soon after Paige gets home, and I accomplish that far more often now than I did then.  I calibrate what I can accomplish in the time allotted far better.  I'm faster and better at planning menus that allow us to use what's on hand far more efficiently.  My laundry rhythm rarely leaves us naked or interrupts other activities.  It helps that the boys are six years older than they were then (oi!), but I have also done what people do as they gain experience: I have gotten more competent.

I don't believe that I am less capable of doing this work because I'm male.  Although girls babysit more than boys, I would hazard a guess that your average delayed-marriage, delayed-parenting, career-launched new mother isn't that much better than her partner at the diapering, feeding, cleaning and sleep management required of a new parent.  But women aren't depicted as falling apart in the kitchen or the nursery because those are traditional female domains.  No one's threatened by her forays into domesticity, even if her graduate/professional degree and rise up the brand management or legal or engineering ladder are inadequate preparation to be a mom.

What would the at-home-dad-who-overcomes-the-odds movie look like?  Where could the moment of triumph occur?  Progress on the homefront occurs in slow motion.  Achievement consists of things like nutritionally balanced lunches packed 4-5 days a week for nine months.  The main motivation for me going part-time in the first place wasn't a singular goal that could be pinpointed (like a military commission).  In the one year post-kids that both of us worked full time we observed that our sons needed more of us than we were able to give when every evening and weekend was a sisyphean mountain of errands and tasks.  My wife was launching her career at a point at which I felt like I needed some kind of professional and work-life change.  I had the good fortune to stay at my job part-time and the opportunity to give more attention to our kids -- and to facilitate Paige giving them more attention by chipping away at the humdrum.  No one comes in and certifies our home as well-run or our children as well-raised.  There's no moment at which the soundtrack could swell and I could stare off into the distance looking proud and relieved.

Dads who are new at this, be strong and competent.  Don't let the sneering diaper-industrial complex get you down.  You can do it.  If it helps, though, I'll come over and whistle Eye of the Tiger while you slice apples.

Other Bloggers Agree

It was nice to see this post from a lady blogger on a friend's facebook wall.  It's very much in keeping with the spirit of Competent Parent.

http://shaunaniequist.com/dads-arent-dumb/

Casserole Week: Mexican Tortilla Casserole

I got this recipe from Lynn Rossetto Casper's enewsletter called Weeknight Kitchen, but it comes from a sexist cookbook called the Mom 100.  Although this blog does not endorse knee-jerk sexism in book titles, the recipe is nice because it concludes with a note about how kids (It's a wonder it doesn't say "girls") can help with this recipe.  Weeknight Kitchen is a reliable source for pantry recipes that can, indeed, be cooked after work on a weeknight.

According to my personal recipe database, I have apparently cooked this once a year in April for the past three years.  It's a good and easy recipe. It even features make-ahead instructions, which is always nice to have as an option.
    

Mexican Tortilla Casserole

From The Mom 100 Cookbook: 100 Recipes Every Mom Needs in Her Back Pocket by Katie Workman (Workman Publishing, 2012).

Serves 4 to 6

Essentially a lasagna with tortillas standing in for noodles, this is one of those dishes that can miraculously be on the table in short order, made from things you most likely have in your pantry and fridge. If you don't like, or you don't have, one of the ingredients, skip it. Or, if you have something else that you think might be appealing all layered in (like slivered bell peppers to sauté with the onions, kale, chopped, cooked broccoli -- whatever the people in your home will eat), then fling it on in.

• Nonstick cooking spray
• 1 tablespoon olive, vegetable, or canola oil
• 1 onion, chopped
• 1 teaspoon ground cumin
• 1-1/2 teaspoons chili powder
• 1 teaspoon minced garlic
• 1 can (14 ounces) chopped tomatoes, drained, with 1/3 cup juice reserved
• 1/4 cup tomato paste
• 2 cans (15.5 ounces each) white, black, or kidney beans (or a mixture of any two), rinsed and drained
• Kosher or coarse salt and freshly ground black pepper
• 1 can (15 ounces) sweet corn kernels, drained, or 1-1/2 cups frozen corn, thawed
• 3 cups coarsely chopped spinach
• 4 medium-size (8-inch) flour tortillas
• 2 cups (8 ounces) shredded Monterey Jack or cheddar cheese
• Chopped fresh cilantro (optional), for garnish
• Sour cream (optional), for serving
• Salsa (optional), for serving

1. Preheat the oven to 400°F. Spray a 9-inch round cake pan, springform pan, or baking dish with nonstick cooking spray.

2. Heat the oil in a large skillet over medium heat. Add the onion, cumin, chili powder, and garlic and cook until you can smell the spices and the onion is softened, about 3 minutes. Stir in the tomatoes with the 1/3 cup of reserved juice and the tomato paste, then stir in the beans. Season with salt and pepper to taste. Let the bean mixture simmer until everything is hot, about 3 minutes. Add the corn and spinach and stir until the spinach has wilted and everything is well blended and hot, about 3 minutes. Taste for seasoning, adding more salt and/or pepper as necessary.

3. Place 1 tortilla in the prepared cake pan. Spread one fourth of the bean and vegetable mixture evenly over the tortilla, then sprinkle 1/2 cup of the shredded cheese evenly over the top. Repeat with 3 more layers, ending with the last quarter of the bean mixture and then the last 1/2 cup of shredded cheese.

4. Bake the tortilla casserole until it is hot throughout and the top is lightly browned, about 20 minutes. Let the casserole sit for about 5 minutes, then cut it into wedges using a sharp knife and serve it with a spatula or better yet a pie server. Sprinkle the top with cilantro, if desired, and serve with sour cream and/or salsa on the side, if you like.

Cooking Tip: You can make the tortilla casserole a day ahead of time, cover it with plastic wrap or aluminum foil, and put it in the fridge overnight; just take it out and let it sit at room temperature for about 20 minutes while the oven preheats to 400°F. Bake the casserole uncovered. You can also reheat the cooked casserole at 350°F for 15 to 20 minutes, until warm.

What the Kids Can Do: They can layer the tortillas, bean mixture, and cheese. Encourage them to distribute the filling evenly across each tortilla and portion everything equally over all four layers.

 

Masthead image from Flickr - user: JillPyrex, photo: small pyrex casserole.  Used under Creative Commons license 

Sigh. Really, HuffPo?

Stuff like this disgusts me. Lots of people shared it from Huffington Post.  It seems to come from something called the Hi! Cardstore. 



Regardless, moms are the only kind of parents, right?  Are we supposed to say "Aw, I miss and appreciate my mom."?  Rather than saying "Wow, I just watched a video whose bedrock position was completely sexist."?  My reaction fell on the latter side. 

Joss Whedon's "genderism" speech wants to replace the wrong word

A speech by Joss Whedon at an event in November 2013 called Make Equality Reality made the rounds on social media with people generally applauding.  This is impressive given that the speech is nearly 15 minutes long.  Online sharing culture doesn't seem to have a 15-minute attention span, but then, this got shared mostly as an Upworthy link.   Maybe Upworthy users are willing to take on longer chunks?  Anyhoo, having seen the speech back when it circulated, I wanted to write about it then, but a) the holidays intervened and b) sometimes a blog post that feels really big is harder to sit down and write.  

Quick highlights: Whedon says that feminism is an outdated word and that we should say "genderist" instead.  He doesn't claim to have invented that word, but he trumpets it and gets a big ovation for his trouble.  Quick analysis: Whedon stops far short of usefully contextualizing "genderist".  Yes, women are people, and people should not be trafficked, harassed or ignored.  That sets a pretty low bar, and it misses the opportunity that a new word creates.  In two different summer issues of The Atlantic plus a December New York Times blog post, there were actually more nuanced and complete examinations of gender and equality issues.  I wished Whedon had delved more deeply like those essays did instead of abandoning his crescendo by following it with a faux low-self-esteem promise to fight quietly in the corner with his ink-stained fingers.

If Whedon had read the articles I cited above, he might have said something different and more useful. 


Whedon offers "genderist" as an alternative to "feminist" (a fact I'd forgotten in the months since seeing the video), but I think that's off target.  I'm not sure there's that much wrong with "feminist".  What I'd told myself he'd proposed when I forgot what he actually proposed is that we should swap out "sexist" for "genderist".  That makes more sense to me.

The Atlantic's The Gay Guide to Wedded Bliss, June 2013

The cover of the June Atlantic touted "What Straights Can Learn From Same Sex Couples".  Liza Mundy's article inside carried the title "The Gay Guide to Wedded Bliss".  In addressing the critics of same-sex marriage, who consider it an assault on traditional marriage, Mundy poses a provocative question with a provocative answer:

What if same-sex marriage does change marriage, but primarily for the better? For one thing, there is reason to think that, rather than making marriage more fragile, the boom of publicity around same-sex weddings could awaken among heterosexuals a new interest in the institution, at least for a time. But the larger change might be this: by providing a new model of how two people can live together equitably, same-sex marriage could help haul matrimony more fully into the 21st century. 

The part about same-sex weddings increasing interest in heterosexual marriage was just a fun perspective I hadn't considered before.  The article talks about wedding officiants finding themselves more busy than they've been in a long time with both same-sex weddings and weddings of heterosexual people jealous of the fabulous events celebrating their same sex friends' couplings.  The big point here, however, concerns marriages not weddings.  Same-sex marriage offers "a new model of how two people can live together equitably".  Drilling down to detail, Mundy says: 

Same-sex spouses, who cannot divide their labor based on preexisting gender norms, must approach marriage differently than their heterosexual peers. From sex to fighting, from child-rearing to chores, they must hammer out every last detail of domestic life without falling back on assumptions about who will do what. In this regard, they provide an example that can be enlightening to all couples.

Here we see where Mr. Whedon could have gone in his speech.  In novelty marriages dotted around the landscape for decades, bold men and women have stepped out and determined that wives can work full-time and men can work less than that and can do laundry and shop for groceries.  In the main, however, especially when children enter a marriage, many couples seem to have shrugged and decided that dad will work and mom will trade career for kiddie carpool et. al. at least for the 25 years it takes to raise a family.  In a same-sex couple, the "default settings" are absent.  Each party and the unit itself have to examine skills, leanings, priorities, personal preferences and make definite choices.  Straight couples could have been doing that kind of joint work to big decisions, but it hasn't felt very mainstream to do so.

The Atlantic's Masculine Mystique July/August 2013

Then the July/August Atlantic featured an essay in which Stephen Marche reframes the dialogue prompted by Anne-Marie Slaughter's seminal "Why Women Still Can't Have it All" the summer before.  He says we've viewed the conflict incorrectly:

 The central conflict of domestic life right now is not men versus women, mothers versus fathers. It is family versus money. Domestic life today is like one of those behind-the-scenes TV series about show business. The main narrative tension is: “How the hell are we going to make this happen?” There are tears and laughs and little intrigues, but in the end, it’s just a miracle that the show goes on, that everyone is fed and clothed and out the door each day.

Marche goes on from this framework to explain his own personal experience with his marriage taking on the economy.  He left a job at City College in New York when his wife was offered a dream job as editor in chief at Toronto Life magazine.

 [I]n my marriage, the decision came down to brute economics: My wife was going to make double what I made. Good schools and good hospitals are free in Toronto. These are the reasons we moved. And if I were offered a job where I would make double what she does, we would move again. Gender politics has nothing to do with it.

Marche's experience presents the economic reason why defaulting to gender roles feels like less of an option for many these days: it's "genderist" to think that the woman must always be the trailing spouse.  This angle also plays up how we don't know the shelf life of certain role decisions we make.  Some event might come along to upset the apple cart and make whatever we'd chosen for a season not be right for a new season.

Finally, speaking of upset apple carts, John Major shared his story with the New York Times parenting blog about what happens to a stay-at-home-dad when the marriage to a breadwinner wife ends.  [Tip of the pen to reader Azure for sharing that one with me.] Spoiler alert: a man who has not been in the workforce for several years and finds himself needing to fight for his rights in a divorce settlement and make his way back into the workforce looks an awful lot like the more familiar woman who has not been in the workforce for several years who finds herself needing to fight for rights and get back into the workforce.

I think it would be cool if "genderist" got adopted.  Yes, I am a man who cooks most of the dinners and loves to bake.  If you think that's weird, you're being genderist.  Yes, my wife is a lawyer at a big firm who makes more than I do.  If you think that's not right somehow, that's genderist.  It's genderist to expect things to be as they have always been in gender roles.  That works as a new word with a more equal-footing meaning than sexist has had.  I find myself referring to sexism against men as "reverse sexism", which is kind of like saying that racism against whites is "reverse racism".  It's not.  It's just racism.  But being a sexist has come to mean pre-judging or boxing in women.  Genderist could apply more equally to broad brush statements about both men and women.

You're welcome, Mr. Whedon.

I'm not fighting Huggies alone

Two different alert readers sent me the link to this New York Times article about how fathers - especially "daddy bloggers" - really dislike being ridiculed in advertising.  The article focuses on a daddy blogger summit (Thanks for the invite!), but my readers forwarded the link because of Chris Routly's activist response to Huggies ads.  As you know, I've railed about Huggies pejorative depictions of incapable fathers here and here.  

It was bittersweet to find out that Mr. Routly had launched a change.org petition and gotten 1300 signatures and a meeting with Huggies ad execs. On the one hand, it was good to know I was not alone in hating that whole ad campaign.  On the other hand, I'd decided to launch here on Competent Parent a mancott of Huggies.  I was inspired by the girlcott launched several years ago by Pittsburgh teenagers against Abercrombie and Fitch.  I was inspired by Peter Chin, wife of a college singing group friend, whose change.org campaign got Apple to take down the very offensive Make Me Asian app.  But now that Mr. Routly has reached Huggies brass, there's no need for my mancott.

So, let me just take this chance to announce: THE MANCOTT AGAINST HUGGIES IS OVER.  YOU CAN GO BACK TO BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS, GENTS.
       

Post Update: Mazda5 Review and more Sexism from Huggies

These two items don't go together at all, but I wanted to update each of them, and neither of them felt like a full post, so I mashed them together.

When I reviewed our then-new-to-us Mazda 5 (a year ago yesterday), we'd never driven it in snow of any import. Now that we have, I'm unhappy to report that though it goes OK in the snow, it's not an easy car to get out of a parking space in snow and ice.  The zoom-zoom of Mazda advertising fame mostly comes through in front wheel drive that all too eagerly spins the front wheels in a futile attempt to move the car.  Twice on solo drives around the city in post-Christmas snow, I found myself feeling like a solitary Ernest Shackleton piloting the micro-van version of the Endurance. OK, perhaps a little dramatic there, but when I got into these spots, I really didn't feel like I'd get out.  I managed to get out of one snow wallow by rocking back and forth in reverse and drive.  The death knell seems to be stepping on the accelerator.  In our succession of Honda Accords, I could power and slide myself out of a predicament like this.  In the Mazda, I had to just take whatever inches of movement I could achieve while idling forward or back.  The second parking space, I don't think I would have extricated myself without the help of a passerby with a shovel.  

The risk of getting stuck again inspired me to put a bucket of salt in the car and invest in a portable shovel that stores in three small pieces in the shallow tray in the back cargo area.  So far, these steps have had a prophylactic effect: no snow to worry about has fallen since I put them in the car.  It's a shame, because the shovel looks really cool, and I'd like to review its functionality.

In other update news, I found Huggies at the sexist advertising game again.

Unlike the last ad I pointed out in this space, this one doesn't have explicit text saying fatherss need extra-good leak protection.  This one just uses an image that I feel almost certainly would not be used featuring a mother by any company.  Sure, triplets are overwhelming.  Even so, moms just don't get depicted in ads this way - as overwhelmed, in-over-their-heads incompetent goobers.  In the comments section on that earlier post, we talked about the fact that if it seems like a sexist message, but we can't put our finger on exactly what it is, maybe we should live with it because at least an ad for a baby product has a father in it.  That conclusion doesn't sit right with me.  If dads are going to appear rarely in ads, I'd rather they weren't depicted as incapable to handle the job of parent.

Sexist advertising

 After bemoaning the sexism inherent in Kix's long-time slogan, I was initially pleased to see this Huggies ad in my coupon circular.  After all, there's a manly dad with a baby, and Huggies targets his fellow dads as baby goods consumers.  

Upon closer inspection, though, I saw that this ad may, in fact, slap back-handedly at mens' parenting skills.  These diapers are supposed to stop leaks better.  The ad encourages putting it to the ultimate test.  Why does it promote that for dads?  Are they implying that dads change diapers more rarely than they should?

Perhaps I'm reading too much into it.  Maybe they're funning with the way dads like to hold their kids.  This manly, slightly scruffy, tattoed, tee-shirt-wearing hot dad holds his dad at a crazy arm-curled angle.  Baby seems to love it.  And maybe sex symbol dad couldn't do that if the diapers weren't dependable.  

Something feels rotten to me.  Wouldn't moms like leak-preventing diapers as much as dads?

Chart: Sexism in Cereal Packaging

You know it's true. Just look:

 

Sexist dryer

In our new house, we inherited a dryer that believes in very traditional gender roles. I don't know how long it's been there, but apparently it hails from an era in which we believed the dryer was an appliance to brighten a lady's day. No more high-effort clothes-wringing. No more backyard clothesline. For you, the fortunate lady, this machine lightens your load and frees you up to do more interesting things with your time.

It reminds me of the "Lady" school sports teams like the "Lady Lions" or "Lady Bears". I wonder what a "Lady Kenmore" mascot would look like and whether the team would rally behind her.

Aside from the dryer's intrinsic bias, I take issue with the design of the door. For the last ten years (and probably longer in apartments), I've had a side-hinged dryer door that swung open and tucked against the front of the washer. This little lady has this Murphy bed/diving board affair that makes it rather challenging to get back into the back of the dryer and get the last few stray items. I see no advantage to this design; if I had younger kids, I'd worry about them putting their weight on there and bending/breaking it.

But what else would you expect from such an unenlightened appliance?