No-No Words!

No matter which side of the political isle you fall under regarding the current news story about transgendered people using the restroom of their choice, I am more interested in the fact that adult professional newscasters cannot bring themselves to use anatomically correct terms for male genitalia. I am not sure where this comes from, but I have a couple of ideas.

What I am talking about is the use of terms such as, “male parts,” “male equipment,” and even, “male junk!” What is the big deal about saying the word “penis?” In describing almost any other part of the male body, newscasters and the general public use anatomically correct term; we say arms, legs, ears, and usually even buttocks. But when it comes to genitalia and their functions, everybody seems to hedge, whether talking about a male or female body!

One reason is probably due to how we talk about our bodies to our children, especially very young children. We used euphemisms for many things, potty for bathrooms, beddy-bye for sleep, and, of course, peepee for urinating. Also prevalent are fingies, tootsie, footsies, etc. when talking with pre-verbal and very young children, but all the euphemisms gradually fall way after children turn five or six. So why do these culturally inoffensive words that deal with our genital also not fall by the wayside?

Another reason probably is the puritanical history of our country, with strict codes of ethics and morality until the 1960s. I remember as a teenager growing up in the south, my father telling me to turn on the water in the sink when urinating to mask the sound coming from the toilet! Like, what else would I be doing in the bathroom for about two minutes! Like women did not need to urinate themselves and would be so scandalized to hear a male urinating; of course, he did not use urinating, he said “passing water!” And this is so ingrained in us, that even I forget at times and use words like potty and poop.

So many taboos fell away in the 60s and 70s with regards to ethics and morality, especially sex, but here it is half a century later and a newscaster cannot say penis! Even more astounding, not only are we still using terms such as pee, poop, and little girl’s/boy’s room as adults, but we’ve made up new euphemisms that we would yell at our children for using!

Boobs, tits, knockers, schlong, one-eyed wonder, Johnson are just a few. Doing a quick search, I found over 200 synonyms for breast and 2000 for penis! While this discrepancy can be partly explained by needing different words due to the physical condition of the penis, whether it is flaccid or erect, I would bet that the majority of all these euphemisms come from men and their insecurities surrounding anything to do with genitalia and sex!

And what is it with the movies? Vulvas have been shown in films since Last Tango in Paris came out in the early 1970s, but very few penises ever make it to the big screen. If they do, it better be quick and flaccid, otherwise the movie will garner an X rating. Sure, you might say, the vulva is usually hidden by pubic hair whereas a penis could be seen through the pubic hair, but I would bet this phenomenon is either misogynistic, male insecurities around their genitalia, or both!

I am absolutely amazed at the dearth of knowledge or, worse, the misinformation people have about sex in general and their bodies in the, so called, information age. Working with children, teens, young adults, and even those in their 50s, it is truly sad to witness the embarrassment shown if, due to some information they have imparted, the subject of bladder and bowel movements have to be addressed in a session. Forget having an honest discussion about their sexual lives until about the third or fourth time it is brought up! One way to start combating this just to use correct terminology with children, no matter the body part or function. But first, adults will have to get over their fear of using the no-no words!

Continue Reading

It is not okay!

The other day I was talking with my daughter on the phone when my granddaughter began to cry. I heard my daughter say, “It’s okay JoJo, it’s okay.” To which I gently replied, “No, it is not okay.” I must be experiencing what recovering smokers or alcoholics experience when confronted with their old habits. I recognized this as something I used to say to Susannah when she was crying and, now that I am aware of this statement, I am hearing this phrase all the time from parents to their children.

Unfortunately, if we examine what is being said, that statement is placating at best and dismissive of what the infant is expressing, at worst. When this happened, JoAnna was four months old, how else is she or any infant to communicate her dislikes? Four months is about the time that I have found that parents begin to discern the differences in a baby’s cries, recognizing the tone, volume, and intensity. However, even the tiniest of cries is a communication, whether we are smart enough to decipher them.

I have not done any research on this, but I would imagine that at this point in their life, there is no way to know if the infant’s preferred way of relating to the world will be auditory, visual, or kinesthetic/somatic (touch and/or feeling). I do know that infants utilize all three at different stages of their development, both trying to explore their new world and in communicating. Even if they are maybe crying to let us know something is simply displeasing them, take a look at how their whole body is involved! Later on, hand gestures will augment and clarify their cries.

One way in which I like to drive home a point is to either use an analogy or to state the point in the extreme. Imagining an infant could talk and was saying “I need your attention because I am feeling abandoned,” would we reply, “It’s okay?” Even if this request is totally selfish on the infant’s part, say you have just turned away for a moment, and they are demanding 100% of your time, would we answer, “It’s okay” after this statement?

Words have meaning. Although a preverbal child may not know what is being said, there is an energy behind the words that conveys a meta-message, the message below the message. What message is being conveyed by, “It’s okay?” Using the example above, is the message, “It is okay that you feel abandoned,” “It is okay that you feel ignored,” “It is okay that you feel dismissed?” I know that is not what the parent is really trying to say. Still using “It’s okay,” is not what I would call a complete communication.

After being hammered when using “it” in my dissertation, I now know that this is a meaningless word. We humans have a hard enough time truly communicating our thoughts and feelings to another without using easily misunderstood words and “it” is one of the worst. Just exactly does “It” refer to?” Is that word referring to the crying, the situation, the baby’s feeling, or something else? At least take the time and make the effort to define “it!”

Assuming that the “It” in the phrase “It’s okay” in the above example is really trying to communicate, “I hear your crying,” the absurdity of this statement then becomes truly apparent. “Your crying is okay.” Gee, thanks mom that I have your blessing to communicate to you in the only way I know how. How about, “Your feeling of abandonment is okay.” Really?!? If the child just fell and feels even minor pain, are we saying, “Your pain is okay!”

We need to remember are talking to an infant that has almost no reference in the world, no situational memory to draw upon, and no way to conceptualize what an action truly means. For many months, a baby does not even know where the pain she is feeling came from, she just know that she hurts. Since the communication is a cry, how much better to acknowledge the cry has been heard, conceptualize what we think in happening, fully giving our attention to the child?

Again, they may not understand, but they will feel the message. My daughter may have said, “I hear you are displeased and it might be because I am talking to Poppy and not paying attention to you. I love you and I am going to fully pay attention to you when I hang up in a few minutes and then we will play again. If you need me to hold you while I am talking, just let me know.” First, this in of itself is giving attention to the baby and in an authentic way, acknowledging that they are trying to communicate a thought and/or and emotion. Then, we are framing a time period and offering a return to what the baby considers normal, her mother’s attention. A further benefit is allowing the child to feel disappointment and then learn that feeling does not last forever, preparing them for when disappointment again enters into their life adventure.

Convoluted, you say! I would offer that this complete communication only feels strange because we simply do not practicing this form of speech. Instead of passing on incomplete communication techniques, how much better to begin to authentically communicate with an infant, and then carrying that communication forward as she grows, coaching them how to talk. A colleague of mine practiced this communication with her daughters and then witnessed one of them communicating with her dolls in exactly the same manner!

My daughter has become so adept at this style of communication, she even taught me! A couple of months later we were driving to Denver to see my dad and Susannah brought up an issue with her in-laws that is causing the family some concern. After a few minutes, JoAnna began to cry and Suz immediately acknowledged that JoJo might be concerned that something bad might happen to her paternal grandparents, apologized for having an adult conversation with me that we didn’t realize would be upsetting to her, and let JoJo know there was nothing for her to worry about. Did JoAnna understand the words, of course not, but she did understand the energy of our conversation. After being acknowledged, JoAnna responded with a smile and no longer cried!

Also, do not expect this to come naturally, that same weekend I watched JoJo one afternoon when Suz and Charlie had errands to run. JoAnna was a bit cranky due to not wanting to take a nap and although I didn’t say “It’s okay” much, I still caught myself saying that phrase! As is the case with all parenting/grandparenting, getting it right the first time is not necessary, but that we then initiate a repair when we recognize we have not parented optimally. I had several opportunities to repair that afternoon!

Continue Reading

Preferential Abuse

I saw one of those postcard postings on Facebook the other day and while I agree with it, I am also wondering why it is so exclusive and the sentiment so pervasive. It is a quote by President Jimmy Carter that stated: “The abuse of women and girls is the most pervasive and unaddressed human rights violation on earth.”

First of all, I have not checked to see if this quote is actually real. The Internet, for all its wonderful ability to disseminate information, can also be used to disseminate untruths. Whether true or false, the quote will be fodder for this blog! This quote is one of those interesting dichotomies, a statement that is true and false at the same time. It is also a dichotomy squared as the former president also speaks both the truth and falsehoods, sometimes in the same breath. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think this is intentional on his part, we all, to some extent, are closed systems, therefore we see things through the prism of our thoughts and beliefs.

As to the former, women and girls are most definitely abused, but I would offer for the President’s consideration that some men and almost as many young boys are too. Children are very vulnerable and it really does take a community to insure that we protect them. I found it disheartening that there was so much media and social attention to the 200 young girls that were recently kidnapped in Nigeria and virtually no mention of the 29 boys that had been shot or burned to death just weeks before. Where was the #saveourboys social media blitz?

Are young girls more special than young boys or is it just the number killed/kidnapped? If so, at what number over 30 does the killing/kidnapping of children in Nigeria become relevant? Is it killed/kidnapped at one time? Twenty school children are killed in Newtown and it dominates the news for weeks, but throughout 2010, 66 school-aged children were killed in Chicago and nothing much was reported. Are killings in school more important that killing children out of school? Even worse, could it be that white children killed in Connecticut and Colorado are more important and worthy of reporting than black and brown children in Illinois?

What I find even more disheartening is after a couple of weeks, all the #saveourgirls had disappeared just like the girls themselves. I do not doubt that there are some still working behind the scenes to help the girls and their families reunite, but you wouldn’t know it from listening to the news.

One of my favorite quotes is by Erik Erikson and chokes me up every time I read or say it. He was a psychologist that is most well known for his psychosexual developmental stages. “Someday, maybe, there will exist a well informed, well intentioned group of individuals, that consider the mutilation of a child’s spirit to be the greatest of all sins.” Certainly, women and girls are abused more than men, but do we need to be more concerned about one type of abuse over another? To Erikson’s quote, I would add the mutilation of any person, anywhere, in anyway, of any gender, color, age, or religion!

Continue Reading