Freakonomics: Perfect Parenting, Part I

When I first opened the book to find the title of this chapter, my first impression was what an oxymoronic thought. That there could ever be perfect parents, or for that matter perfect children is, to me, just is not going to ever happen. In the same sense I am not a perfect child, nor am I a perfect parent and I certainly did not help produce the perfect child. This chapter covered a number of interesting subtopics. All of which, as we are discovering, hold some degree of merit in their own unique ways.

The first subtopic covered was the notion that parents are poor risk assessors. I had to agree whole hearted with the gun in the home vs the swimming pool in the back yard. After better than 27 years as a full time emergency services responder, I have experienced one accidental shooting of a child under the age of 10. On the average, I responded to an average of 4-5 child death incidents each year of my career. The majority of those deaths were directly related to traumatic injuries such as falls, pedestrian struck and motor vehicle crashes. Falls off bicycles, down steps, out of windows, into pools and even off hay wagons. Struck by vehicles backing or forward both at high and low impact speeds. Lastly were those from motor vehicle crashes. The majority of the remaining cases I responded to, the death of the child was due to parents, or parent's significant others causing traumatic injuries. SIDS deaths accounted for only 2 of the incidents I have encountered. Not one child died of a gunshot wound caused as a result of a handgun in the home. In essence, I concurred with the authors on this subject.

I loved the author's assessment of experts as well. That the "experts" consistently contradicted each other and even themselves is so true. Just in the lifetime of my child the "experts" have waffled and or flipped opinions on so many child rearing issues. In part, it's sorta of like medicine. Wait long enough and what was once considered outdated will once again come back again as valid treatment.

The neatest information though had to be with the Chicago Public School (CPS) study. Wow! What I had thought made a difference did not and what I had thought would not make a difference did. The surprising "not" factors to me were;
*Intact family
*Mother not working between birth and Kindergarten
*Parents reading to child every day
*Visiting museums and regular spankings.

Surprising "were" factors were;
*Adopted
*Many books in home
*Child's birth weight and mother's age

Overall another very interesting and thought provoking chapter. Now if the authors could only show me sources for being a better parent to teenage girls!

Why do drug dealers still live with their Moms?

Once again the authors ask another question that makes you go "Hmmm". I have spent at least 20 of my last 30 years working in urban communities in Michigan and Pennsylvania. I got to know a lot of the dealers, prostitutes, their pimps, their territories and had the opportunity to hear quite a few their life and/or death stories. Working in their world while different isn't all that different from corporate America, as the authors tell us.

The consumers, products and the clientele are different but the principals are similar. That being said however; being involved usually means when you fail you pay in jail time, violence and death rather than unemployment lines and job seeking web sites. I really loved the question asked and answers via real life analysis given the reader. I felt the authors really researched their subject and told the story in a meaningful and educational way. They were blunt, as life can be. Nice job, look forward to the next chapter.

Freakonomics; KluKluxKlan and Real Estate Agents

What an interesting correlation. The author's once again took an outside the box look at two old institutions. The section on the leaking of KKK information to "main stream", for the time, media and it's effect on membership, attendance and activity was eye opening to say the least. The fact that once the Klan's activities became public whether due to social pressure, fear factor or maybe just that if everybody knows it's not a secret anymore mentality drove members or prospective members away.

The second section was very good as well. How interesting that the same Real Estate agent that urges you to sell is the same one who will wait an additional 2 weeks for an extra 10 thousand dollars. Not surprising when the study puts things in black and white. When selling your house for an extra 10 thousand dollars the agent only makes $150. So when he/she advises you to sell what's the motivation. Is it; "I need to pay bills and I need the money now" or "$150 isn't enough to make me want to answer another 20 phone calls and do another 5 showings over the next 2 weeks". I have heard agents talk like that. One agent told me in conversation that she "probably could have gotten $20k more for a particular property" but at the time she hadn't sold anything in 4 weeks, her husband was laid off of his job and her mortgage was due. She rolled her eyes and said it hurt her to advise the sale. I never thought about the poor guy who just took her advice and didn't get the extra money to pay his bills.

Another great chapter. Am looking forward to the next one.

Freakonomics; Chapter 1, Reading assignment for 3/22

What an enlightening reading. Firstly, I found the authors' style refreshing and interesting. Secondly, I liked the way they looked at the subject matter. Teachers and Sumo wrestlers. A good "outside of the box" look at the subject matter.

I thought the analysis of cheating, whether it was daycare parents, school teachers, Sumo wrestlers or bagel eaters was an interesting way to evaluate a number of social and moral issues all in one cohesive chapter. The process was unique, the statistical analysis seemed sound and the summary was spot on. The authors, by virtue of the reading, found innovative methods and manners to analyze multiple social trends from multicultural and multi class view points, state the thesis, analyze the thesis and demonstrate the answers in a believable and interest sparking view.

Following this chapter, I am interested in finishing the book! Good reading.

Marked Women, Unmarked Men

What an interesting essay. The author went into great and thoughtful detail to denote to the reader why she felt the women at the conference were "marked". In an almost Sherlock Holmes style she took us step by step into the female marking process. While she did not leave the males out of her observations, she did use their dress and styling as a classic example of why she felt they remained "unmarked".

Lets start with women. I agree that women tend to be more suspect to "marking" than the male gender. Her reference to the surname battle is a prime example. In my career I have met many women who had difficulties in deciding whether or not to take the husband's surname at marriage. If they did, I would agree that it "marked" them as married when introduced with the hyphenated surname. I will agree that a woman's title of Miss, Ms. and Mrs. marks them as well as opposed to the man's Mr. title.

What I did agree with was how women's dress, hairstyle, makeup and the like marks them as well. I also realize that this form of marking can be deceiving as well in both men and women. While a woman's marking may tell us what they want us to think and feel, is it a true reflection of how they really feel? Could it be that a woman's dress is more cultural than personal. That the decision to wear high heels on a hiking excursion more lack of experience then personal expression? I wonder.

Regarding males, while I agree that cultural norms have given men more latitude in remaining somewhat less marked, I disagree that all men aren't marked. From hairstyles, presence or lack of facial hair, body build, clothing and accessories are just the tip of the ice burg. Just as women may be more perceptive to other women's marking, males might be more perceptive of other male markings. While males may not "mark" as women, they mark with mannerisms and positioning. My observation is that males are more apt to position themselves in meetings and classrooms depending on their personal position regarding the subject, other participants, especially other males. This takes place by room seating choices, folding of arms, positioning of their body towards others by displaying or not displaying their power side. The power side is which ever side is dominant for that individual.

While I don't agree completely with the author, I think her point is extremely valid. To say I haven't personally utilized those markings in my lifetime regarding personality, status, whether or not to approach, or other perceptional labelling would not be true. Just as I look for other signs of marking that she didn't touch on.

2/17 - Star Wars And America

What an insightful essay. Prior to reading Ms. Black's work, I had never thought of Star Wars in an "American" old fashioned western sense. Please excuse the pun, but it makes sense. George Lucas just took the Hollywood "B" movie spaghetti western and moved the plot line forward a hundred years or so. Brilliant!

Ms. Black also nailed the thought regarding American values, good versus evil, tyranny and oppression. Not too long ago, I had the opportunity to re-watch two of the original Star Wars movies. It's funny how you notice what now are considered "old school" special affects, but in retrospect we all oohed and aahed over the original productions. The music, like today's Pirates of the Caribbean was played everywhere. Lets not forget the action toys too. Now I know why we felt that way we did about the movie. American values of democracy and goodness versus the evil dictatorship of the Empire. Nice job Ms. Whitney Black!

2/17 - Deciphering I, Robot

I really appreciate Jason Silverman's view of movies in general and I definitely related to his review of I, Robot. His assessment of the role of movie tricks and the use of style to seduce the movie goer into superimposing good artistic work over sub par movie making, to me, is right on. (see previous post) Appreciated also was his analogy of the role big business has on the film industry. Granted, 100 million dollars is a ton of money to outlay to produce and market one film, but as the author points out, what is sacrificed in thought provoking presentation or realistic story telling is replaced with slapstick comedy, sex, violence and chase scenes that sell the tickets and makes the money.

Case in point was Silverman's opine as to the departure from the original 1950 book by Isaac Asimov. Silverman makes the correlation that the book represents, as was the author's style, a mastery of clear, sharp logic. The movie then was it's antithesis by virtue of too many loose ends, plot-convenient moments and lack of rigorous thought.

That Silverman states that you have to "turn off your brain" to enjoy the movie is exactly what is wrong with popular genre movie making of today in my opinion. Almost all of the thought provoking issues are replaced by sex, violence and chase scenes. Chalk one up for the thoughtful insight of Mr. Silverman.