But spellers and geography whizzes aren't the only pint-sized phenoms generating buzz these days.
Take Tom Schaar. At only 12 he's already a skateboarding legend. He recently became the first person to ever land a 1080 (I definitely had to look that up) and he's the youngest person to ever win a gold medal at the X Games.
Another impressive young man whose achievement I wouldn't quite understand even if I looked it up is Shourryya Ray. At 16 he is being hailed as mathematics genius for solving a problem that Newton posted over three centuries ago. Based on his work "an item's flight path can be calculated and predictions can be made about how the object will hit and bounce off a barrier." It seems to me that this solution will have real practical implications as well. (Let's just hope that the skateboarding Tom Schaar never becomes the object bouncing of a barrier!)
Ashima Shiraishi is another pint-sized phenom I wouldn't want to see bounce off of any barriers. At only 11 she is already one of the best female boulderers (people who climb rocks using just their hands and no rope). Because this is the US and there's a competition for everything, it should come as no surprise-- given that she was recently profiled in The New York Times--that Ashima came in first at the American Bouldering Series Youth National Championship. Though the sport isn't much older than they are, kids are a target audience for the growth of the sport.
Also recently profiled in the Times, but for a sport that is a bit older than bouldering, is 14-year-old Francis Tiafoe. Tiafoe is the top ranked boys player in his age group. Especially impressive for the son of the tennis club's maintenance man who essentially grew up in a closet there.
It's striking to me that so many of the pint-sized phenoms are immigrants or children of immigrants. As a sociologist this isn't surprising, but it is remarkable (in the sense that it is to be remarked upon). If you watch any of the televised Bees you'll see a similar pattern, for the most part. In any event, it's exciting to see so many talented kids generating buzz doing things they love to do.
I've been studying parenting for about a decade now as a sociologist. I always strive to contextualize families and their parenting decisions by thinking about both the micro and macro structures that impact people's everyday lives. Now that I'm a mom that hasn't changed. I know that not everyone will make the same decisions that I make, and I won't make the same decisions as others. But just as I do in a professional context I strive not to be judgmental and instead understand where people are coming from-- and I like to start from the position that parents are making decisions with the best interests of their children in mind, even if those interests may at times be ill-informed and thus perhaps misguided. (Of course this has it limits, like if a child was being abused, but thankfully I have never been in that position.)
That's why I like to think of myself as a pacifist in the midst of the latest iteration of the Mommy Wars. As a nursing mom who is (trying to) work three to four days a week, I understand both how hard it is to stay-at-home and how hard it is to work. As with anything in life, it's hard to find a balance. That's why the most recent saga in the Mommy Wars seems to vex so many: it doesn't appear to provide much balance, especially for mothers.
The latest drama is attachment parenting, which isn't really that new, but has become so talked about thanks to celebrity endorsements (like Mayim Bialik's new book, Beyond the Sling: A Real-Life Guide to Raising Confident, Loving Children the Attachment Parenting Way. Originally popularized by a physician-husband and nurse-wife team in the 1990s, William Sears' 2001 The Attachment Parenting Bookspelled out the tenets of extended on-demand breastfeeding, baby-wearing, and co-sleeping. But it's the latest, highly controversial cover of Time that has really vaulted the philosophy into the popular consciousness. If you haven't yet seen it, here it is:
Last week I appeared on NECN's The Morning Show to talk about the controversy and offer common sense advice to moms.
[I couldn't miss the irony that after doing the show I raced home to feed Little Man!]
We know from anthropologists that in many parts of the world toddlers are breastfed-- I'm guessing not while standing up, but you never know. In the US we have so much (and perhaps sometimes too much) food readily available so in some ways it's less necessary for kids to rely on breastmilk to get proper nutrition to grow. In any case breastmilk certainly is a relatively free way to nourish a child-- though extraordinarily time-consuming (eta: Yes, time is money, so ultimately it costs lot; but not out-of-pocket like formula at the moment)-- and until six months the science tells us that it does more than just give calories, it actually helps boost a child's immune system by passing on antibodies through the mother.
I tend to trust good science, based on randomized experiments and solid laboratory work. I also tend to trust my body and my baby to figure out what is healthy and good. What I don't tend to trust are labels. When you label your behavior it just sets you up in opposition to others, as I mention in the clip. One of the things I found most interesting about Pamela Druckerman's parenting hit from earlier this year, Bringing Up Bebe, is that in Paris parents don't "subscribe" to particular parenting philosophies. They just parent. She claims it's American parents who tend to want to clearly identify and research particular schools of thought.
In the end mothers need to use common sense, know themselves, their partners, and their children and find the happy balance that works for them—and not worry what the mommies around them are doing. It’s hard enough today without fighting a new type of mommy war! Although I must confess that I hope if Carston ever appears on live TV at age three or four he'll be slightly better behaved...
As I sat down on the exam table for my twelve-week ultrasound and pulled up my dress I asked the technician, "Any chance you'll be able to tell us the sex?" She patiently explained that it was unlikely, but possible-- though even if she could make an educated guess I shouldn't go shopping for any sex-specific baby clothes. I nodded eagerly as she lubed up my rapidly growing belly.
"So you want to know the sex?"
Well, let's be honest: If you can tell that early, you've got a boy.
Later that day I sent the above captioned picture to some friends. I was officially growing a penis.
The news rocked my world. How could I be having a boy? Me- the girl raised by a single mother (a former Miss America who made her living in the beauty business), who attended an all-girls' school for eight years, who writes about femininity, who is a girly-girl who always has her nails done and hates to leave the house without a "face on"- a mother to a son? I immediately panicked because I hate dirt and have no interest in things with big engines. Of course, I know this is totally stereotypical, and not always an accurate assessment of boys' preferences (I confess to hoping that playing Broadway music while pregnant would shape those preferences)... Yet I couldn't help but mourn the loss of a manicure buddy.
Of course, like every new mom, I wouldn't change a thing about Little Man.
I've joked from the beginning that we've saved a lot of money on clothes and jewelry by having a boy (and when I read articles like this recent piece in the NYT on kindergarten style I *know* this is true-- though I do admit to having a particular weakness when it comes to the boys' clothes at Janie and Jack). But lately I've started thinking about this in a much deeper way and I'm grateful to have a boy, and even a bit jealous of his future life. I often think about how much time, and money, he will save. This morning I put on a facial masque before taking a shower, where I then took the time to shave. After showering I moisturized (face, body, hair), though today I skipped drying my hair (rainy day in Boston), a process that usually adds 15-30 minutes to my getting ready routine (though less now that I am losing hair in clumps at four months postpartum). Add to that the application of mascara, a hint of blush, gloss, and tinted moisturized-- de rigeur for leaving the house. I'm hoping to sneak in a manicure and an eyebrow wax later in the day. Clearly, being a woman is expensive, and it can hurt.
Of course I understand that it is not a necessity that I do all of these things all of the time, but nothing that I do is unusual for the vast majority of American women. And, sure, being a man is sometimes painful as well (the day he was circumcised has undoubtedly been Little Man's worst day-- and probably mine as well!), but over a lifetime it's more painful, more time-consuming, and more costly to be a woman.
For much of the 1990s parenting experts and the popular press fretted over girls and their costly futures (think Reviving Ophelia), but the new century brought a new concern about boys as the "fairer sex" began surpassing them in the classroom. Books like Raising Cainhelped solidify the worry, showing that there are higher rates of violence for young men today and a more uncertain job market in their futures. As a sociologist who has studied gender I always was aware of these issues and concerns, but I never took them personally.
Until I started to grow a penis.
My Amazon cart began to change a bit as I expanded. Instead of orders dominated by titles on girls and athletics and beauty pageants, books like Michael Thompson's It's a Boy! Your Son's Development from Birth to Age 18began to sneak in.
So much of life in our competitive culture is required to be strategic and performance- or outcome-based, it is tempting to apply the same approach to parenting. With hopes of producing the best boy ever, we might set out to cultivate the best of traditional male attributes (smart, strong, steady, and uncomplaining), but then perfect him by adding the quality of emotional literacy and subtracting violence and excessive aggression so he can be successful in life. Many parents speak about parenting as if it were a giant school project: if you just start soon enough, read the right research, and do the right things, you can get the particular end product you have in mind. (Page 25)
In other ways, I had a lot to learn. I learned the hard way to put a wipe over aforementioned penis during changes (I've been told that this area is easier to clean for boys, but having no basis for comparison I can't really say). I fretted over autism (the rates are higher among boys) until I consistently got a social smile. I will continue to worry a bit about ADHD, which is more often diagnosed among boys than girls (notice I say "diagnosed" because it's unclear if the actual incidence is higher among boys as well-- or at least that's how I understand the literature).
That's one of the reasons I was excited to receive a copy of the new book Raising Boys with ADHD: Secrets for Parenting Healthy, Happy Sons. One of the lines in the Introduction really spoke to me: “It’s your job as a parent to help your son identify his purpose, develop his talents, and learn how to get along with people." (x) Books like this help parents by providing concrete, practical advice on raising children, especially those who may have particular needs. For instance, I loved the idea of writing a letter to your child's teacher each year to tell him/her about your child and how they best learn (examples are even provided on pages 19-21)-- a suggestion that may appeal to many (so long as you limit your letter-writing to the beginning of the year and not make it a weekly occurrence, of course).
Like many mothers out there unfamiliar with the terrain of boyhood I expect I will turn not just to books but also to my husband, who knows a lot more about having a penis than I do, despite the fact that I so successfully managed to grow one (even now when Carston gets a bath I often leave the cleansing "down there" to John, explaining that he knows how hard you can actually scrub before it hurts). While I am doing my beautifying rituals and listening to showtunes Daddy can teach Little Man about dirt and engines, along with probabilities and marginal tax rates.
In the meantime, when I put my books and worries aside, our house is filled with the mingled laughter of baby belly laughs, Mommy screeches, and Daddy giggles. I only have to watch this video (especially around the nine-second mark) to know that my son has a wonderful role model.
I suspect that most everyone who applied to college this year was a pint-sized phenom in their own way-- but especially those who made the cut at the most selective schools, which were more selective than ever this year, as I wrote about earlier this week.
But you don't just have to be a bookworm to be a phenom, as this month's group of kids prove. In fact, with an athlete, a chef, and an innovative businessman in this group, they prove that all you need is an entrepreneurial spirit.
1) Winter Vinecki- This 13-year-old is a well-rounded phenom; she's a stellar athlete, student, and entrepreneur who has already been featured in renown publications and has the support from entrepreneurial websites like http://jonstreet.com. This Sunday Winter will embark on an amazing journey: Trying to be the youngest person to ever complete a full marathon on all seven continents. Why is she doing this (other than, like her fellow Pint-Sized Phenoms, to presumably stand out when it comes time for her college application)? It's for a great cause. Winter is running to help raise awareness for prostate cancer, which took her father's life three years ago. Her nonprofit, Team Winter, has already raised $300,000 for prostate cancer research! While I'm not sure it is always safe for a pre-pubescent girl to run seven marathons, I applaud her willingness and drive to help others, borne out of her own tragedy.
2)Flynn McGarry- Another 13-year-old pint-sized phenom with a memorable name, Flynn was recently profiled in The New Yorker (you can't read the print version online, but you can read the extra about him by clicking on his name). Flynn started cooking seriously at age ten (working his way through The French Laundry Cookbook). Now that he hosts a monthly pop-up dinner for 17-ish at his home (dubbed "Eureka") for $100 a head he's being homeschooled. Two days a week he interns at a high end restaurant in LA. One chef declares that his pure palate (untouched by tobacco and alcohol) helps make him so great, but it's clearly a lot of hard work and sacrifice, too. I wonder how long it will be before we all get a taste of Eureka either through a high-end restaurant, a cookbook, or a reality show (or all of the above)?
3) Caine Monroy- In the past few weeks nine-year-old Caine has become an Internet sensation thanks to this short film, Caine's Aracde. Trust me, it's worth taking the ten minutes to watch!
What can you say about Caine except that he is an exceptionally imaginative, innovative, inventive, handy, and entrepreneurial kid? Can't wait to see what he thinks up next-- beyond cardboard.
Caine, and all of the pint-sized phenoms, will have great stories to tell when it does come time for higher education (both the campus kind and the life kind). Luckily, based on his recent exploits, Caine will also have some money saved away to help afford the best, which he surely deserves.
Testing and Tiaras are back.
Earlier this month TLC's Toddlers & Tiaras returned with new episodes in Season 5. And last week Toddlers & Tiaras "superstar" Eden Wood premiered her own show on Logo; Eden's Worldfollows Eden into her post-pageant retirement life (which still involves pageants-- as she and her mom serve as child beauty pageant mentors to pageant hopefuls-- but also includes Eden and her warring managers pursuing modeling and music opportunities in NYC).
Lest you think Eden and her pageant pals are the only pre-pubescent kids being pushed by their parents on television you should have tuned into Nightline on April 13th. The episode featured families with preschoolers studying for the standardized tests to get them into a gifted classroom in NYC's public school system. Not only were these kids studying, but their parents were paying big bucks to help them prepare. Think thousands and thousands of dollars, hours of time, and untold stress. One mom suspects her daughter is purposely sabotaging herself and ultimately doesn't allow her daughter to take the test.
Why are stressed out families so willing to spend so much time and money to get their children into these classrooms (the question of why they are also willing to announce their children's standardized test scores on national television is a discussion for another time)? In the ever increasing educational arms race the pressure to perform starts younger than ever, especially if the goal is an Ivy-like education. This spring we've heard that Ivy League colleges had their lowest acceptance rates ever (a truly frightening 5.9% at Harvard and 6.8% at Yale). These single-digit numbers create intense cultural anxiety even among those who don't yet have kids.
But it's not just the numbers "at the top" that are scary. The stats are just as bad when it comes to kindergarten-- at least in NYC. According to The New York Timesthis year nearly 5000 children qualified for only 400 slots in talented and gifted kindergarten classrooms. That's an 8% acceptance rate. But note that is only for qualified kids, not for the hundreds, likely thousands, more who took the test. People like to criticize these parents for pushing their kids too young, but with numbers like these at four, and then at age 18, can you blame them? Moreover, it's not just kindergarten. Middle school testing matters a lot too, and perhaps more so, if you think high school is the real entryway to higher education.
Many stories focus on the test prep companies that have sprung up to make a buck off of these anxiety-ridden parents (though note that many test prep entrepreneurs have their own kids facing the same issues-- one of the three families in the Nightline piece was a woman who started the "top" kindergarten test company, and even her own tot son had issues with the test, which he eventually overcame). And, it is true that test prep, especially at such young ages, likely exacerbates existing inequality, as I've written about before. But, at the same time, these companies are thriving because of a real demand. This demand is fueled partly by them, but it is also a result of demographic shifts in cities, like New York City, and cultural anxiety about class position.
When you really think about it, how different are the moms on Toddlers & Tiaras and the test-prep preschool parents? They may be going about it in different ways, but most of these parents seem to want the best for their children-- helping them pursue particular hopes and dreams and goals (whether it be to get into Harvard and run for president someday, or get a Disney contract and become the new Britney Spears/Miley Cyrus) and willing to spend lots of money to help them pursue those dreams at a young age. Amounts of money that others find ludicrous and distasteful. While testing and tiara parents might find each other foreign in many ways they are cut from the same cloth of our ultra-competitive society, which now targets children in myriad ways. And given the media's reach, their stories and issues impact, and inspire, families across the country and not just in NYC or the South.
Last week four-year-old Heidi Hankins made headlines around the world for joining Mensa with an IQ of 159 (though, shockingly she's not the youngest-- Oscar Quigley claimed that prize in 2009 when he joined at age two-and-a-half with an IQ of 160). Based on her picture I'm not quite sure if she's right for Toddlers & Tiaras or shows like Nightline. Perhaps, in a true sign of the times, she's qualified for both?
