Lightbulb moment

When I adopted Baglady, it took me about two weeks to come up with a pledge. It's madness, I know.

But really, look at it, if we want to have our planet still in working order for our kids, we'd all have to reduce our carbon footprint by 50%. Yawn. Yes, I know, it's not funny, exciting or new. Do keep reading though, and share the lightbulb moment (pardon the pun) I had:

I read this in the New Scientist from about 2 years ago, so it must be true. Just take this percentage as real (of course it's more complex, as in, a person living in the US has a much higher carbon footprint than someone living in the UK and someone in the UK has a much higher one than your average Indian etc) - you see, switching off lights or changing to energy efficient light bulbs, or even getting your loft insulated isn't going to cut it. Somehow, I had a feeling it was a bit futile, this switching off business because my bills have reached the lowest possible denominator and we just can't get below that without being very cold (we are cold already because our heating system can't cope with sub zero temperatures - turning down the thermostat? You must be joking!), getting ill as a result (which increases carbon footprint through use of medical stuff) and tapping in the dark.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't do these things, they're all great and save you money, so surely it's a no brainer to at least attempt all of this.

The big carbon belzebub is something else. It's what's driving our very economy, it's the holy grail of economists and politicians alike: consumerism and growth. They are interlinked, our economic model is dependent on growth - without growth no jobs etc, but growth can only continue as long as we buy stuff. Stuff like a new mobile phone every year. Lots of toys, clothes, latest gadgets, everything really.

We, you, I, they won't save the planet by switching off the TV that is on standby overnight. It's not buying the TV that's going to make a difference. Cheerio retail therapy.
And yes, not buying stuff will have an adverse effect on our economy. That's because our economy is, simply put, unsustainable. Unsustainable is not just a word that goes in one ear and out the other. It means that things really and truly can't go on as they do right now. As in, things will change, and we can either take control of this change or be victims of it.

Communism didn't work, we know that already. But neither does capitalism in its consumerist form. We just haven't seen the full collapse yet.
As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem advocating not to buy stuff, because as far as I can see, it's the only way that my children will have some quality of life in 40 years time.


So, from here on, I will endeavour to remind myself at all times to (a) consider if I really need something I'm about to buy, and if the answer is yes, (b) to try and make it (plan A), to buy second hand if I can't make it (plan B), and to buy handmade if I can't get it used (plan C). I will also gladly buy services because they pay people and their skills, rather than create demand for stuff.

Something along the lines, get a massage as a treat instead of a box of chocolates.

:::::::::::::::
PS sorry for lack of links, got a poorly baby sleeping on my lap as I type this and can't be bovvered...

The Normality of Breastfeeding

I live in a place where breastfeeding is the exception rather than the norm. It came as a surprise to me when I was first presented with this fact, about 10 years ago, when a friend of mine had a baby and was the only new mum in the 13 bed ward who was breastfeeding. I also remember being asked in a questionnaire why I chose to breastfeed - and that my reason (because it's the normal way of feeding a newborn) was not an option.

It makes me wonder if the low breastfeeding rates in certain places may be related with formula feeding being perceived as the norm, and if re-establishing breastfeeding as the norm may lead to improved breastfeeding rates.

One example where formula feeding was established as the norm was when someone decided to base the growth charts on formula fed babies. This has since been changed - so this time around, Snowflake is measured against growth charts of breastfed babies (and following her line spot on) while Cubling was measured against formula fed babies (and kept dropping as time went on, giving me a lot of worry if I was doing the right thing). Although these charts gave me worry with Cubling, I never questioned them. But now that I'm more relaxed about weight gain, and can see my own different attitude and how the new chart gives me confidence that things are going well, I realise how crucial this change is. Hopefully it will give confidence to many breastfeeding mums, and more than that, demonstrate that the norm against which baby growth is measured is that of a breastfed baby.

At nursery, Cubling has been learning all about babies. It's been a great theme, just at the right time. She comes home and continues the role play with her favourite teddy (she's not into dolls as such, her teddy is her baby, it's a girl and her name is Snowflakes middle name). She tells me all about why babies cry, that they can't walk yet, that they visited the baby room and how proud she is that she has a real baby at home. She'll change nappies, wipes teddy bums, dresses teddy for bed and outdoors. And she's filling up bottles to give milk to teddy.

Mummy cringes. All my nursing and my daughter at 3 years already fills up bottles (of the breast pump at least, but bottles they are nonetheless).
I cringe even more because when I dropped Cubling off at nursery one day, and Snowflake was crying (I didn't get the timing of feeds right), a nursery teacher passed and asked Cubling if her baby sister needed a bottle.
Bless Cubling, she just retorted by saying "no!" and pointing to her breast.
What it shows though is that at nursery, the message given out to our youngest is that the normality of baby feeding is the bottle (filled with formula, why else would you measure milk?) - possibly out of a false sense of prudishness (I'm guessing). It's an opportunity lost, an opportunity to re-establish the normality of breastfeeding in an area of Glasgow where the rates are bound to be doddling around the 10% mark.

And I'm particularly disappointed because this is a nursery that prides itself in its eco status, it's environmental awareness and does generally so well in these areas. Shouldn't this not also translate into some gentle encouragement of the message that breastfeeding is normal? It's not about promoting breastfeeding, just about treating it as the norm, to which there will always be exceptions.

Have you experienced situations where breastfeeding wasn't/isn't treated as the norm? Should I take this up with the nursery?