Rebecca Sullins 8:39 pm on May 26, 2015
Tags: Musings ( 9 )

Ok… first draft here. I…

Dennis Hong 8:03 pm on May 27, 2015
Okay, I like this and definitely think it’s a good lesson. Here are my thoughts in no particular order:
- I think the title needs to reflect the tone of the post a bit more. Maybe something like, “Just Because You’re A Mommy Doesn’t Mean Your Opinion Is Automatically Valid,” or something equally… well, combative. 🙂 “In Defense of…” just doesn’t sound that compelling to me.
- As you basically pointed out, the core conflict in your story comes in at the paragraph about you browsing Facebook. I like your exposition, but I also think you need to move that initial conflict up. Otherwise, everything up to that point just sounds like aimless ranting.
- Related to that, your story is really just those two paragraphs. I think you need to expand on the story a bit, to find a better balance between telling the story and reflecting on it.
That’s it for now. I’m going to think a bit more about the overall structure, so I’ll get back to you on that.
- Rebecca Sullins 7:43 am on May 28, 2015
  
  Yeah, I think you’re right on all counts. Let’s see…
  
  How about “Becoming a Mom Doesn’t Make You Right.”
  
  I will try moving the Facebook story up… I think that will make the “aimless ranting” seem more pertinent. Especially if I word it to revolve more around the conflict.
  
  So, since I’ve never used the workshop before… how do I edit? Should I just edit my post? Start a new one? What’s the best way?
  - Dennis Hong 9:58 am on May 28, 2015
    
    how do I edit? Should I just edit my post? Start a new one? What’s the best way?
    
    That’s a good question. I’d say it’s up to you. 🙂
    
    As for the title, I think we can hash that out later. For now, let’s figure out the overall structure. I’m compiling my thoughts at this moment and will post more in a bit.
- Rebecca Sullins 7:46 am on May 28, 2015
  
  However, I will say that the idea of “mommy shaming” is so prevalent in the mom community that I feel like it’s an important point. I may have to see how the restructuring affects the tone of the piece before I retitle it.
Miss Bonnified 8:44 pm on May 27, 2015

PREACH! I’m a new mom myself and I agree, especially about the vaccines.

I also agree with Dennis. I think the title should be changed to reflect more of the tone of this piece. I also feel like the meat of this article starts when you warm up on the car seats issue and then you go whole hog with the vaccines.
- Rebecca Sullins 7:45 am on May 28, 2015
  
  Yup… this is the first time I’ve ever actually put my FIRST draft up for people to read. It usually goes through a few iterations before I post it. So I’m definitely still just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks here.
  
  Thanks for the confirmation!
  - Rebecca Sullins 7:48 am on May 28, 2015
    
    Also, congrats on being a new mom! It’s a hell of a ride!
Dennis Hong 10:59 am on May 28, 2015
Alright, having thought more about this, here are my suggestions….

I feel like the basic gist of this post is that mommies are allowed to be right about everything, or that you’re not allowed to correct a mommy, because she’s acting out of love?

Is that correct?

If so, then the point of the post is to break down this sentiment.

If that’s the case, then I think you first need to do a better job of building up the original sentiment before breaking it down. The problem is that anyone who’s not a mommy may not realize that that’s what, uh, mommy culture is like. I for one wasn’t aware that moms are given so much leeway when it comes to voicing their opinions. So maybe you can spend a paragraph or two expounding on that, to give the piece a broader audience.

So, what I’m thinking for structure at this point is something like this:
1. Introduce yourself as a new mommy.
2. Describe the Facebook incident, and tell us how exactly you “jumped in with a little shame.” End with you getting called a bitch, but don’t go into more detail about that quite yet. I think this will help generate a bit more suspense.
3. Go into your rant. This is where you can expand on mommy culture.
4. Return to the Facebook incident and give the actual details about how it’s not even debatable that child seats need to face backwards.
5. Bring up the vaccination issue to add some relevance.
6. Wrap it up by talking about the problem with hormones, etc.
I thought of a line that you might include somewhere in the conclusion, too. Something like, “As a mommy, of course you love your kid. But understand that your kid can’t survive on love alone.”

Anyway, that’s how I envision one structure that might work. Don’t take it as a gospel, though, as this is pretty subjective. Feel free to see what you can do with it, but either way, I think what you’ll want to do right now is map out your overall structure, to keep the flow a bit more organized. Hope that helps.
- Rebecca Sullins 6:00 am on May 29, 2015
  
  Definitely helps. And that’s the way it was shaping in my mind… but I couldn’t get the words to come out in the right order… so now that they’re down, I’ll take another crack at putting them in the right order this weekend!
  
  Thanks!
  - Dennis Hong 11:25 am on May 29, 2015
    
    Awesome. I think this is close enough, so when you’re ready, just post it as a draft on Musings, and we can go from there.
  - Dennis Hong 11:28 am on May 29, 2015
    
    Also, I’m trying to be good about finding properly licensed images now (since we’re getting more traffic, and I don’t want to get slapped with a lawsuit). Feel free to look through Flickr’s creative commons section for an appropriate image:
  - Dennis Hong 2:36 am on May 31, 2015
    
    Depending on how deep you want to go into the vaccination thing, here’s an article that might be worth linking to:
    
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2015/05/30/vaccinations-vermont-chooses-health-over-fear/
    - Rebecca Sullins 6:03 am on June 1, 2015
      
      Oh yeah… I’ve read them all! I’m a member of a FB group all about how anti-vaxers are morons. Ok, not ALL about it, but close.
      
      California is currently TRYING to do the same thing with SB277, but it’s facing a lot of opposition.
      - Dennis Hong 10:46 am on June 2, 2015
        
        The like is for your first paragraph, not second. :-p
Mary Jo 7:25 am on June 16, 2015

Ok, I know that you’re mostly being facetious, especially in the beginning of the essay, but I’m going to really dispute your use of the word ‘shame’ and the idea that it can ever be a good thing. If you read Brene Brown’s work on shame, it is clear that shame is always destructive and never helpful. Look up her book Daring Greatly and her viral TED talk.

Brown emphasizes that there is a difference between shame, guilt, and embarrassment. In this essay you use ‘shame’ to mean all three feelings, when I think you only really focus on guilt. Shame destroys from the inside out, as it encourages people to internalize a message that they are rotten at the core and irredeemable. Guilt, however, can be productive, because it encourages restitution and a change in behavior. The message of guilt is “I did something bad, so I need to make up for it, but I’m still a decent person.” Embarrassment is a fleeting feeling caused by doing inappropriate things like wearing speedos on Main St. It’s good that people are embarrassed to do inappropriate things, but it’s not a good thing if the reason people don’t wear speedos on Main St is because they are deeply ashamed of their bodies, because that is a destructive feeling with no positive outcome. The idea that shame is necessary for a functioning society is analogous to the idea that atheists cannot be moral people without believing in the carrot and stick of heaven and hell.

Before reading your essay, I wrote in a draft of an essay on mommy wars this line, which I think is super relevant here: “I’ve come to realize that beyond the extremes of abuse, neglect, and deliberately disregarding medical advice, there isn’t much that we’re sure about in parenting. ” The two examples that get you really fired up, the car seat and the vaccines, are covered by this statement. Yes, it is true that science tells us facts about car seats and vaccines, and so we can be sure that certain choices concerning them are better and safer than others. You are right about that. But I don’t think it’s useful or good to attach shame even to these clearly bad choices. Shame doesn’t trigger change, and is more likely to make someone dig in their heels. (This is putting aside the studies that prove that anti-vaccers are the least likely people to change their mind about vaccines because their ideology disavows scientific evidence as invalid.) Guilt, on the other hand, makes people change. And what’s really important here is that the parents change their behaviors to make their kids (and in the case of vaccines, all the kids) safer. Not the superiority and righteousness you feel on facebook telling someone they’re wrong.

I think you should change ‘shame’ to ‘guilt’ in the essay and see how that works. “Mom guilt” is a thing as widely discussed, if not more, than “mom shaming.” Facebook moms jump on you for heaping mother guilt on the other mom. And you own it. That’s totally fine.
- Rebecca Sullins 8:23 am on June 16, 2015
  
  The point of this article is not at all to get into a semantic debate over the psychological difference between shame and guilt. Because in the colloquial, they are used interchangeably. So I’m not really going to go into that. In the discussion of the “Mommy Wars,” shame is commonly used to describe inflicting guilt on another person, while guilt is used to describe what you yourself feels when you stick your kid in front of Daniel Tiger while drinking a glass of wine.
  
  Seriously, Google mom shaming, and then Google mom guilt. You’re going to get two very distinct sets of behavior. And since I’m speaking to the women often caught in the Mommy Wars, I’m sticking to the terms they use.
  - Mary Jo 8:45 am on June 16, 2015
    
    You don’t have to go into the psychological differences or the definitions of these words in your essay. I agree that they are used interchangeably by people who are ignorant of the real damage of shame and the difference between it and productive guilt, but I don’t see what good it does you to use the term ignorantly too. I think colloquially in the mommy wars, “shaming” is used to talk about sending someone a message that they’re a bad mom. It goes beyond inflicting guilt on someone and is an attack on their identity. I agree that colloquially in the mom wars “mom guilt” is used mostly as a self-focused emotion rather than something others inflict on each other, but I think sometimes it’s a one-time feeling people get over, and other times they say “mom guilt” when they mean something more serious, which is deeply internalized shame.
    
    What do you see as the difference between mom shaming and mom guilt and why does it make you think that shaming is ever appropriate or helpful?
    
    I think one of your main points is to rail against the idea that there are no standards in parenting because we’re not allowed to judge and shame each other. You say that yes, there are standards when it comes to safety and medical advice from doctors, and thus shame is justified and necessary in these situations. My argument is that shame is never justified or productive, but that you are right that standards do still exist. You can uphold standards of safety without arguing for your right to make people feel like crap.
    - Rebecca Sullins 12:01 pm on June 16, 2015
      
      Ok preachy. Point made. I don’t agree. Period.
      - Mary Jo 2:12 pm on June 16, 2015
        
        Yes, it’s clear to me as well that our disagreement is more than semantics. I’d love to hear what others think of this controversy. The bottom line may be that a bold stand like the one you’re taking, even if I consider it misguided, is the kind of thing that gets clicks.
    - Dennis Hong 2:24 pm on June 16, 2015
      
      I think this is coming down to an argument of semantics. At the same time, I also agree that the word “shame” is a powerful word for many people — one that conveys very negative feelings.
      
      Having said that, I get that you’re a blunt person, Becca, and using “shame” here is definitely more your style. But I would also add that you may want to proceed cautiously here, as it may be a bit of a trigger for some people.
      
      There, how’s that for straddling the fence. 🙂
      - Rebecca Sullins 2:37 pm on June 16, 2015
        
        Very diplomatic, sir!
        
        @maryjotewes, And I understand the point, but saying I’m using that word for clickbait is pretty arrogant and condescending. There are reasons to use a word one doesn’t like, or that has negative connections…. and you’re dismissing them all, assuming you’re in the right. The tone of the article may change… and so may the title. But the point I’m trying to get across is valid with the use of the word shame.
      - Mary Jo 4:51 pm on June 16, 2015
        
        I don’t think it comes down to semantics or word choice, but the disagreement is at the level of ideas and values. I tried to talk about it as a matter of semantics at first, but after a little more back-and-forth I see it goes beyond debates about the meanings of words and the contexts in which they’re used. The bottom line is that I think that shaming someone (ex. telling someone they’re a bad parent, that they’re rotten at the core and irredeemable, making people feel like crap, attacking their identity) is never justified or effective, and Rebecca thinks it sometimes is.
        
        I’m sorry if the comment on clicks sounded condescending. It wasn’t meant that way. I don’t think you’re using the word purely for shock value, it’s just that you honestly hold an opinion that others may find shocking. My main point is that controversy isn’t always a bad thing for a blog, so just because I disagree doesn’t necessarily mean Musings shouldn’t run it.
Katie M. 9:58 pm on June 16, 2015

Ok, per Dennis’ request I’m going to jump into this fray.

First of all, I also don’t think it’s semantics (or being blunt); the proper term for what Rebecca is describing is indeed “Mommy shaming.” Maybe the rest of us feel like shaming isn’t appropriate, but Rebecca does and wants to make that point in this piece–fair enough.

Towards that end, Rebecca: I’d suggest some editing to make sure you really focus on the mommy shaming. I actually think you’ve got two themes going on here:
1) “Everyone has their own opinion, and you know what, sometimes those opinions are wrong.”
2) “Shame makes our society more livable.”
You could (and should!) make a good piece out of either of those statements, but I think this one is suffering a bit because you’re trying to do both at once. So, working under the assumption that you’re going for theme 2: I’m not hearing enough about why you think shame is an effective tool, or why it’s justified in some cases. I’d like to see you really build on what you say in the paragraph about speedos and in the last few sentences, and cut the parts that mostly support that first theme. I also suggest toning down the language about the craziness of anti-vax folks and carseat turners, only because I think it distracts from your main point and could get readers riled up for the wrong reasons (save it for when you write about the first theme, though!).

Finally, I agree that moving the facebook incident much closer to the start is a good idea–and while you’re at it, you say that you “jumped in with a little shaming,” but you don’t give us any details. I think you could use that incident as a great example of why “shaming” works, by explaining why whatever you said was more effective than something all sweet and diplomatic.

Oh, and I actually thought the title was pretty good.
- Mary Jo 6:02 am on June 17, 2015
  
  Ok I want to help Rebecca make an argument I don’t agree with.
  
  I agree with Katie that there are two points in this essay, and that they distract from each other so one of them should be eliminated. I think point 1, that some opinions are just wrong, is the much stronger point, and the one more strongly connected to mommy-shaming in particular, to the parenting-related situations described about the facebook debate about car seats and vaccines.
  
  Point 2, that shame makes society liveable, is a much weaker argument because it’s so much more generalized and thus harder to prove. (And I think sociological/psychological/anthropological research won’t back you up.) So I think you should cut point 2 and stick to point 1. Your arguments for point 2 are undermined by the fact that your two examples, the speedos and bad singing, is really about embarrassment, not shame. I said it in an earlier comment, but it’s worth saying again, because if you can’t respond well to this counterargument, that shows the weakness of this idea: The idea that shame is necessary for a functioning society is analogous to the idea that atheists cannot be moral people without believing in the carrot and stick of heaven and hell.
  
  So I guess my advice is the opposite of Katie’s, and it’s really colored by the fact that I strongly disagree with point #2, but can get on board with point 1 fairly easily. So take it or leave it.