by wj
(No, it’s not what you think! This is an Open Thread that doesn’t start out about politics. No matter what you assumed from the title.)
Last spring, I decided that spending all my time sitting (either in front of a computer screen or with a book) was probably not the best idea. So I have gradually started walking more and more.** There are other people out walking around: other folks mostly retired, or getting ready to be, younger folks jogging, young mothers pushing infants in strollers.
One thing I notice is the latter group. I can understand the urge to get out of the house. And the desire to get the kids some “fresh air.” They are walking around the neighborhood, sure. But also out along the major streets. And around downtown. Places where there are lots and lots of cars. And I can’t help but wonder…
Yes, auto exhausts are vastly cleaner and less toxic than when I was very young. But infant lungs are still far more fragile than adults’. And all those strollers put the infants’ heads right down there level with the exhausts of all the cars. That just can’t be good for them. So
What are they thinking?!?!?
** Fun fact. You may have encountered the notion that the ideal is to walk at least 10 thousand steps per day. Know where that comes from? A Japanese manufacturer was putting out a line of pedometers. The Japanese (and simplified Chinese) character for 10 thousand is 万, which notionally looks like a man walking. Ergo: marketing!
What are they thinking?!?!?
Guesses:
1. They don't know the risk.
2. They are at least vaguely aware of the risk and are making a conscious trade-off against other harms.
I would ask a question back: You are talking about an urban area, obviously, or there wouldn't be "lots and lots of cars," nor would there be sidewalks to push strollers on. Nor are there likely to be yards where people can take their kids out to play. Where else do you suggest people take infants to get them outdoors?
On my two short trips to NYC, I was surprised at the # of infants being pushed in strollers everywhere I went, and just as a quibble, I suspect that a lot of the people pushing them were babysitters or nannies, not parents. Where do you suggest THEY take the babies to get them outside for a bit, and to get a change of scenery?
If you've never had to to bundle up a child or toddler to go out, and get the kid into and out of a car seat every time you make a stop, let me tell you, it's not a minor overhead to your day. Bundling an infant up to get them in/out of a car seat, only to have to get them in/out of a stroller for your next fun activity, and then back in the car seat at the end of the adventure, all so you can push a stroller in a park, a bit further away from traffic (if you can find a parking place) is not a small enterprise either.
My record with an errand run with my two toddlers was 13 stops. Thirteen stops with two little ones in and out of car seats. There's also the task of making sure one of them doesn't toddle off while you're dealing with the other one. Fun fun!
Sometimes I remember that factoid and try to put together a list of what the 13 stops were.... When you live in the country and go to "town" only once a week, the errands pile up.
Someone around here once proposed that people with infants in car seats should be allowed to use handicapped parking spaces. I wasn't lobbying for that, but I took a devil's advocate position in favor of it one day in an argument with an (able-bodied, adult male) asshole who was ridiculing the idea. I would have liked to see HIM do what I did with the 13 stops and 2 kids in car seats. (He was a lawyer, an acquaintance of an acquaintance, just a guy who was at the edges of my world of friends, and I guarantee you he never took a kid in a car seat on any errands he ever did, if he ever did any himself instead of having his wife do them. He was that kind of guy.)
There. A pre-breakfast, pre-caffeine ramble.
You did ask. ;-)
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 09:59 AM
Memories: Our idiom was to say we were going "to town," not the name of the town where we did most of our errands, doc's appts., etc.
I happened to take my daughter to Boston when she was somewhere between a year and two years old, old enough to be talking but still small enough so that I could carry her in a back carrier. We were walking through Harvard Square with a friend of mine and my daughter looked around and said, "Mommy, is this 'town'?"
Second memory: when my elder child was born, a high school friend who had had 4 kids before I had any sent me a poem called "Cradle Song," by W. B. Yeats:
The last four lines have stuck in my head all these years, and despite how much my ramble about car seats sounds like complaining, and despite how much I enjoy my kids as grown-ups, I miss those little people I used to hang around with. I'm treasuring my second run, with grandkids.
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 10:09 AM
They are at least vaguely aware of the risk and are making a conscious trade-off against other harms.
Like the risk of going f**king bonkers. Not a good ingredient for parenting. There’s a reason you’re supposed to secure your own oxygen mask before trying to assist others on a sudden loss of cabin pressure. (Or the onset of cabin fever?)
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 27, 2024 at 10:13 AM
Like the risk of going f**king bonkers. Not a good ingredient for parenting.
Yes, absolutely. And this is not an easy era for parents of little ones in that respect. Think covid, for starters, although most people are ignoring that at this point.
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 10:51 AM
My record with an errand run with my two toddlers was 13 stops. Thirteen stops with two little ones in and out of car seats.
People have been arrested for leaving their kids in the car for a few minutes while they picked up their dry cleaning or did some other short task.
Speculation on the impact of child car seat regulations on the birthrate.
"The nationwide average minimum age at which children are allowed to ride in cars with just seat belts has risen from less than 3 in the mid-1980s to just under 8 today. This steady increase, the paper suggests, could help explain why fertility rates have declined in the last decade despite a long-running economic recovery that would normally encourage more childbirths. To tease out the impact of car seat laws, the paper controls for variables such as urban density, household income, and whether a male parent is present.
While these laws are intended to save children's lives in the event of an automobile accident, Nickerson and Solomon argue that the effect on birthrates is much bigger. The changes 'prevented only 57 car crash fatalities of children nationwide in 2017,' it says. 'Simultaneously, they led to a permanent reduction of approximately 8,000 births in the same year, and 145,000 fewer births since 1980, with 90 [percent] of this decline being since 2000.'"
Are Car Seat Laws Driving Down America's Birthrate?: While these laws are intended to save children's lives in the event of an accident, Nickerson and Solomon argue that the effect on birthrates is much bigger.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 27, 2024 at 11:52 AM
Sunny days cause baseball games, too, right? But this correlation doesn't even have that much logic behind it.
Did they actually ask any parents why they didn't have a third child? Did they consider the utter disaster that is currently the housing market, in terms of people being able to afford houses big enough for more children?
Sheesh.
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 12:09 PM
I would ask a question back: You are talking about an urban area, obviously, or there wouldn't be "lots and lots of cars," nor would there be sidewalks to push strollers on. Nor are there likely to be yards where people can take their kids out to play. Where else do you suggest people take infants to get them outdoors?
Actually suburban. Streets in the neighborhoods don't get much traffic. Most days, I can walk 3-4 miles and pass maybe 2 (running) cars. But there are also arterials which have a lot more traffic -- say pass a dozen cars every block, often 2 or 3 times that number, sometimes even more. And "downtown" in our town wouldn't impress someone from an urban area. But there's a pretty constant stream of traffic.
What would I suggest? Well, sticking to the neighborhood streets would be one. Even the ones which date to the middle of the last century and lack sidewalks -- there's so little traffic that the chances of two cars passing in opposite directions where you are is nil. And there are walking trails throughout the area (most of them paved), where what "traffic" you encounter is people racing by on bicycles. :-)
There are yards, too, of course. Also little parks scattered around (it's a pretty upscale area). Kids, including infants, are using both. I was just focusing on the people out walking.
Posted by: wj | January 27, 2024 at 12:13 PM
people racing by on bicycles...
...are often a menace, in my experience. ;-)
Thanks, wj, for the clarifications. I guess I'd say that some people may simply want the exercise of pushing the stroller instead of staying in the yard or at a park. And they don't think too much, if at all, about the air pollution from the cars.
Paved walking trails sound nice. :-)
I would be very hesitant to push a stroller in the road, although I've seen joggers doing it. That's another thing people don't seem to be very aware of, i.e. their own lack of visibility to cars. But that's a whole separate topic.
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 12:39 PM
Paved walking trails sound nice.
Personally, I prefer the graveled ones. Easier on the feet. ;-)
Posted by: wj | January 27, 2024 at 01:56 PM
Personally, I prefer the graveled ones. Easier on the feet. ;-)
Well as far as that goes, I prefer the ones that are just cleared forestland, with maybe a few pine needles underfoot. I made the comment about paved ones with the thought of someone pushing a stroller in mind.
Posted by: JanieM | January 27, 2024 at 02:53 PM
Put me down for Team Pine Needles. Perfect balance of cushion and support, plus the fragrance.
Posted by: Pete | January 27, 2024 at 05:04 PM
Cause both our kids are out of the house, my wife and I have been doing the Pikmin Bloom app, which gives you various rewards for steps. It is related to the Nintendo game Pikmin (now Pikmin 4)
https://pikminbloom.com/en/
We didn't walk so much when the kids were little, which is unfortunate, I think it would have been better for them, but as Janie points out, it's not a 'let's bounce' activity, it's more akin to planning the climb Everest.
Posted by: liberal japonicus | January 27, 2024 at 07:04 PM
Put me down for Team Pine Needles. Perfect balance of cushion and support, plus the fragrance.
I confess I was thinking of gravel in contrast to straight dirt. Specifically, in winter, mud.
Beyond that, pine needles, grass, wood chips, etc. are all fine. Although I am not fond of the kinds of berries which get dropped by some trees. After walking in them, shoes tend to leave marks once I get inside.
Posted by: wj | January 27, 2024 at 07:32 PM
I tend to walk on the grass along the streets when available. My feet get a better flexing workout and my boots last longer. The tread of good quality boots wears out all too fast in suburban environments.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 27, 2024 at 08:25 PM
Walking through SeaTac airport just about ruined my hip joints and the arches of my feet. I wasn't wearing my hiking boots--a mistake. Ironically, the gentle slightly bouncy surface of the desert in New Mexico was a pleasure to walk on.
Posted by: wonkie | January 30, 2024 at 05:23 PM
I never used a pushchair (which i think is the translation of "stroller") or a pram. I had a baby björn, and, when there were two, my shoulders for the elder. (Once a group of Chinese tourists found this so quaint that they all took photos of the three of us.)
So my children were at least breathing much the same air as I was.
Posted by: Pro Bono | January 30, 2024 at 08:57 PM
I just want to say, since this is an open thread, that few have been so insulting about ChatGPT as I have been. However, I saw this chez cleek, and he has given me permission to post it here. It reveals that, whatever else, ChatGPT is great at satire, in this case of the language which artists and curators regularly use:
Me: give me an artist's statement for my exciting new sandpaper toilet tissue
ChatGPT:
Artist's Statement:
In the realm where innovation meets the tactile experience of everyday life, I present my groundbreaking creation: the Sandpaper Toilet Tissue. This unconventional medium challenges traditional perceptions of comfort and hygiene, inviting individuals to reconsider the mundane rituals of personal care.
Inspired by the juxtaposition of luxury and discomfort, the Sandpaper Toilet Tissue transcends the boundaries of conventional bathroom products. The coarse texture encourages a heightened awareness of the physical self, engaging users in a sensory exploration that goes beyond the ordinary. This deliberate departure from the softness we associate with bathroom essentials encourages contemplation about the choices we make in pursuit of comfort.
In a world saturated with products designed for maximum ease and pleasure, the Sandpaper Toilet Tissue serves as a bold reminder of the resilience of the human spirit. It prompts us to question the societal norms that dictate our preferences and challenges us to embrace the unfamiliar. Through this artistic endeavor, I seek to provoke conversations about comfort, resilience, and the boundaries we set for ourselves in the pursuit of pleasure.
As users navigate the unexpected sensation of the Sandpaper Toilet Tissue, they are invited to reflect on the nature of comfort and discomfort, sparking a dialogue that transcends the confines of the bathroom. This project aims to provoke thought, disrupt the status quo, and elevate the discourse surrounding the choices we make in our daily lives.
Ultimately, the Sandpaper Toilet Tissue is more than a practical product; it is a bold artistic statement intended to ignite contemplation and reshape perceptions. Embrace the discomfort, challenge the norm, and embark on a journey of self-discovery with every use.
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | January 31, 2024 at 08:48 AM
That is actually quite good, indeed.
Reading "sandpaper toilet tissue" I feel reminded of some old Soviet jokes (versions of it probably existed in other Eastern Bloc countries too, definitely in Eastern Germany) that centered on two issues: 1) Soviet toilet paper is indistinguishable from or even superior to sandpaper and 2) it never ever separates at the perforation.
The other product related joke in numerous variations was about matches (the most fireproof material in the known universe).
Q: Why is the production of matches in the Soviet Union now under the ministry of art* and culture?
A: Because it is high art to light them and it takes lots of culture not to curse trying to do it.
*I don't know about Russian but in German "Kunst" means both art and skill => "it is an art" = "it takes great skill"
Posted by: Hartmut | January 31, 2024 at 10:11 AM
GftNC, that was a gem! And a salutary remindar that just because you see well (or at least competently) written praise of something, that doesn't mean it is actually a good thing.
Posted by: wj | January 31, 2024 at 01:16 PM
Google Bard takes a similar track.
Abrasive Ablutions: Unveiling the Gritty Muse
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 31, 2024 at 03:19 PM