Author: simchajfisher

Reader is looking for real-world account of infertility

From a reader:

question – do you know of a writer similar to yourself who writes from the perspective of infertility after having had kids.what i mean about a writer similar to yourself is that real world, humorous view of life & kids & God’s will. i need to read someone who writes from the perspective of someone who has had kids but is currently going through some kind of infertility but wants more kids but is struggling with God’s will in the matter. i don’t know if i’m making any sense. every writer i come across is all very holy & pious and “Imma offer everything up” and while I appreciate that view, it’s totally not me. I need someone who says, “Yes it sucks that I’m going through this and it sucks to try to live with God’s will in this.” haha. any suggestions? do you think your readers would have any suggestions?

Anyone?

Two great questions from men about NFP

I had a great interview with the witty and insightful Scott Eric Alt of Logos & Muse yesterday, and he incorporated parts of our conversation into his review, Seven Reasons to Read Simcha Fisher’s Book on NFP.  This question came up:

Why should we trust this mother of nine to make the case for NFP? That’s a fecun­dity beyond all rea­son! Either she’s not using NFP at all (oh the deceit!) or it does not really work. Nancy Pelosi infa­mously said that you call NFP-users “mama” and “dada,” and Sim­cha Fisher is exhibit A.

He’s not the first one to delicately inquire how I presume to write about NFP, when I’ve had so many kids in such a short time.  The short answer is that even exclusive breastfeeding is no match for my incredible, invincible, almost inexplicable fertility.  I’m not kidding.  You will just have to take my word for it that I do know what I’m talking about when I talk about abstinence.

The other answer is that this book is not based solely on my own experience. I was lucky enough to belong to a message board of NFP-users for many years, where men and women felt free to complain and console each other through the trials of NFP.  Not only did I learn about other people’s experiences, I learned that one’s own experience is not necessarily The Experience.

Check out the rest of the interview here.  We also talked about how God’s will works with free will; how NFP is not another kind of contraception, but another kind of life; and why I chose to write around NFP, rather than writing about NFP.

***

Next, Peter of Lightly Salted has written a really nice review in which he appreciates various points I made . . .

 … but all these things do not make the book as valuable as the main thread of her argument that runs through each chapter.

Fisher’s main point is this: sex is for grownups. So if you want fantastic sex, you need to grow up! When we are childish, petulant, selfish and lazy in our approach to sex, it will be disappointing to say the least. So the struggles with married life are a gift in that, learning to be a grownup in our most intimate relationship not only makes that relationship much more fun, frolicsome and fulfilling, it teaches us to be grownups in every other aspect of our lives. In short, marriage helps us grow in holiness.

Right on.  Then Peter asks the second question that has come up more than once: why isn’t there more in the book directed at men?  He says:

 I can hardly fault Simcha for writing from a woman’s perspective. After all, she writes as a woman who has listened carefully to men and seems to understand the basics. But  I wanted a chapter for men! A chapter from a man’s perspective might have rounded off the book as an even more excellent resource for couples than it already is. I don’t mean that she is hard on men. I think she is too soft in places. Sometimes it takes a man to tell other men to ‘man up’, and give some practical tips on how to go about it.

The book has a lot of chapters which are addressed equally to men and women, and then several which are addressed to women, encouraging them to understand, express themselves to, and encourage communication from their husbands.  This was deliberate.

The first reason I addressed women more directly is that women are more likely than men to buy and read a book about relationships, so I designed the book for women to read and then share with their husbands.  I did paint in broad strokes when describing how men and women usually think, and what most men and most women need.  (My editor made me take out a lot of tedious “of course, this may not apply to you”s and “naturally, there is a lot of variation”s.)  The goal of the book was not to tell men and women what women and men are thinking, respectively, but to encourage them to find out what their particular spouses are thinking.  In general, women are more motivated to broach that territory.

The second reason is that the book was already extremely personal, and I really didn’t want to write a chapter that would inevitably come across as “10 Things Simcha Wishes Her Husband Would Understand; Sheesh, What Do I Gotta Do, Write a Book?” or “Mistakes that Husbands Such as Damien T. Fisher, 39, of Southern NH, Make When Dealing with Their Wives.”

Okay, three reasons: my plan original plan was to sell maybe 250 copies of a self-published ebook and that would be the end of it, so I wasn’t really attempting to put together the definitive compendium of NFP-related issues.  But I fervently hope that my book will be the first of many about NFP, and I would love to hear more from and about men.

***

Thanks for the great reviews, Peter and Scott, and for the opportunity to answer those questions!  Readers, if you’re not already familiar with Logos & Muse and Lightly Salted, you’re missing out.

Yet another reason the all male priesthood makes sense

Chatting on Facebook about how nice it would be to hear more from men about NFP — and how tricky it was for me to try to address men, as someone who is not their wife or mother.   We had the following exchange:

Barbara Cobb: “In general men are more willing to accept direction from other men rather than women, including or especially their wives. I think that’s why God in His wisdom set up an all-male priesthood.”

Me:  “Wow, I never thought of that. How many men would go to a woman priest for confession?”

Jenny Townsend: “None. If they want to be corrected by a woman, they will call their mom.”
Me:  “And women don’t always like hearing direction from a man, but rather than avoiding it, they will tell him when he’s wrong, and then demand absolution. Yep, it’s a good system.”
Right?  And, sorry about that, priests.  I know you get pushed around by the nuns and the DRE, too.  Your rectory may be empty and lonely, but at least it’s quiet.

 

My goober valentines

As requested, here are pictures of the finished valentines my kids prepared to give out today(although it turned out to be yet another snow day):

 

And here is the valentine mailbox my son made:

I’m so proud.  Yes, we carefully screen and censor the few episodes of Futuramathey’re allowed to watch!  I’m not altogether thrilled that Bender is such a captivating role model for them; but at least they laugh when my husband says, “OK, kids. It’s 9:00.  You know what that means: Daddy’s sick of looking at you, so go to bed..”

As for the adult plans, we are (as I mentioned) watching House of Cards and eating the rest of the chocolate I bought. He likes the gross gooey ones, and I like the gross fruity ones. And that’s why you need two people in a marriage.

House of Cards – Which version hits harder?

For the first time I can remember ever, I am looking forward to Valentine’s Day.  Netflix will be releasing season two of House of Cards, hooray!  I didn’t like every single thing about this series, but it was always interesting, and sometimes brilliant. It was juicy. I liked it.

After we binge-watched season one, we went ahead and found the original, British version, and enjoyed that, too — although, predictably, in a different way.  James Fallows at The Atlantic (who hastens to reassure us that he’s “not a subscriber to the ‘Oh, the Brits do it all so much more suavely’ school”) thinks that the British version edges out the American one:

There are lots of tough breaks in Kevin Spacey’s House of Cards, but in the end there is a kind of jauntiness to it. People kill themselves; politicians lie and traduce; no one can be trusted — and still, somewhere deep it has a kind of American optimism. That’s us (and me). USA! USA!

It’s different in the UK version. Richardson’s Francis Urquhart reminds us that his is the nation whose imagination produced Iago, and Uriah Heep, and Kingsley Amis’s “Lucky Jim” Dixon. This comedy here is truly cruel — and, one layer down, even bleaker and more squalid than it seems at first. It’s like the contrast between Rickey Gervais in the original UK version of The Office and Steve Carell in the knock-off role. Steve Carell is ultimately lovable; Gervais, not. Michael Dobbs, whose novel was the inspiration for both series, has told the BBC that the U.S. version was “much darker” than the British original. He is wrong — or cynically sarcastic, like Urquhart himself.

I’m not so sure “optimism” is the right word for the American version; and I think I agree with Michael Dobbs that the American version is darker.

The British version is most certainly more naked.

You know how British TV and movies are allowed to use actors who have real faces like real human beings, rather than the uniformly plasticized sparkle people that populate American casts.  Oh, that dry British hair! Oh, those British pores! The story is presented the same way:  one vile action after another, right there on screen.  You are fairly sure that when Francis speaks directly to the camera, he means every word he says.  Maybe I’m just too dumb to catch on (and maybe I’m missing some nuance, not knowing anything about British politics) but the British version often appeared strangely artless to me, with its constant replaying of the scream “Daddyyyyyyy!”  On the other hand, when you watch the final episode, you see that the whole series has been building, with very British patience and reserve, to . . . well, the final episode. You gotta watch it.

The American version

has more ambiguity — characters are more in flux, and their motivations are more confused — which leaves the viewer in a much more precarious place.  When Francis speaks to us, we are really not sure that he’s telling us, or even himself, the truth.  At the same time, the show aims for a level of purely entertaining stylization, signaled with the blood-and-thunder opening sequence and the bombastic theme music. It is clearly setting out to relish every last sleek, cynical second, and occasionally seems a little taken aback (yes, the show itself. Look, I watch TV when I’m tired) when it dips into true horror — which makes those moments all the more horrible. Oh, I was so glad when that awful little reporter suddenly decided to clean up her apartment. That was good.

Anyway, very interesting stuff, right up my alley.  Have you seen both? What do you think?

At the Register: What Planned Parenthood Needs

News flash, Cecile:  Abortion is not and never has been #WhatWomenNeed.

(Our pipes have been frozen for a few days, and my hair is in desperate need of washing; so my vanity won’t let me post a picture of myself holding a #WhatWomenNeed placard.  But if you want to join in the fun with New Wave Feminists, where you can find a template for the placard, my suggestion for What Women Need is “PEACE IN THE WOMB.”)

 

Is there a story in Sochi’s gay bar? Up to a point, Lord Copper . . .

Sochi’s only gay bar is overrun by reporters, who won’t let Russians just sit down and have a damn drink while gay.

Deadspin quotes eight different major news outlets who’ve dispatched reporters to Mayak, where the town’s LGBT community goes to drink and dance. From a reporter at The New Republic:

On Saturday night, I decided to check it out, along with friends who work for The Guardian, TIME, and The Independent. A flock of AP reporters was already there, enjoying mojitos. In the hallway, a TV reporter was interviewing two girls in leopardware on camera. Nearby, a Danish TV reporter named Matilda told me she was interested in doing a story “that isn’t victimized.” It was an important story because “gay rights are a big issue in Europe.” The bar owner, she said, was busy giving interviews in a private room. “We called last week to schedule an interview and we got 15 minutes between the Finns and the Swiss.” Her local fixer tapped me on the shoulder. “There are three more journalists sitting next to her,” he said. But, he explained, they were Russian correspondents. “They’re confused,” he said. “They don’t know what to do, professionally.”

“We’ve given over 200 interviews in the last month,” says Mayak owner Andrey Tanichev. Every country has sent its correspondents, he says, “except the Spanish, God bless them.” The Americans have sent the most reporters, but the BBC has set a record: they came by four times.

Where have I head this before?  Oh, yes . . . in Ishmaelia:

 The bunch now overflowed the hotel.  There were close on fifty of them.  All over the lounge and dining-room they sat and stood and leaned; some whispered to one another in what they took to be secrecy; others exchanged chaff and gin …

“What are you all here for?” asked Corker petulantly of a newcomer. “What’s come over them at home? What’s supposed to be going on, anyway?”

“It’s ideological. And we’re only half of it. There’s twenty more at the coast who couldn’t get on the train.  Weren’t they sick at seeing us go?  It’s lousy on the coast.”

“It’s lousy here.”

“Yes, I see what you mean . . . “

From Evelyn Waugh’s monstrously hilarious, not-entirely-brutal satirical novel Scoop, wherein the wrong John Boot accidentally gets sent to the front lines of what may or may not be an important war, depending on where the all the reporters end up.

Unproceed Sochiward, folks. And take your cleft sticks with you.

At the Register: Death of a Giraffe

Human are more important than animals; but caring about animals is part of what makes us human.

Are you using the right method of NFP?

If you are all done finding out which character from The Hunger Games you are, which character from Downton Abbey you are, and which character from pornoDownton Abbey you are, you might be ready for a quiz that actually helps:  Which Method of NFP Is Right for Me?

For a lot of couples, NFP is even more of a hassle than it needs to be because they’re not using the best method for them.  We happened to stumble into Creighton just because our local hospital offered classes on it; and it turned out to be a good fit for us (although it wasn’t truly tolerable until I discovered OTC progesterone cream.  I think I will write a separate post about that, because it was such a game-changer).

Anyway, try the test from IuseNFP.com and see if maybe you could find a better fit for your personality, your physical situation, and your needs.  It’s not a flawlessly precise quiz, of course, but it may point you in a better direction if you’re really struggling. Sometimes changing methods makes all the difference!

And poke around the IuseNFP site while you’re at it. Lots and lots of useful information there, all in one spot — plus cheeky graphics like this:

And of course, if you are already using NFP and are struggling, or you don’t understand why NFP-users struggle, or you know a couple who’s insterested, or you would just like a shoulder to cry on, you should buy my book, The Sinner’s Guide to NFP.

 

In which my kids make Valentine’s Day weird and creepy

We’ve been doing 3-D lollipop valentines for the last few years. Here is how it turns out when a normal family does this project:

PIC 3D lollipop valentine

 

Cute, eh? It is easy:

1. Take a picture of your kid extending a fist toward the camera.  Leave some blank space in the background for the lollipop and message.

2. If you like, photoshop a greeting onto the image.  If you are alert, you will remember how to paste things in with a transparent background; and if you care, you will be able to talk your kids out of choosing tacky images.  (This year, I was neither alert nor did I care.)

3. Print out enough photos for the class.  We use Walmart’s photo service – turns out fine.

4. Using an Exacto knife, make a slit above and below (or on both sides of) the fist.  Insert a Dum-Dum or other lollipop through the slits, so it looks like the kid is holding a giant lollipop, and tape the stick in place on the back of the photo.

Here is what we have so far this year (before getting prints and inserting lollipops):
one standard (?) lollipop holder:

 

one kid who wants to have the dog holding the lollipop in his mouth:

one kid who is just a crumb:

and one kid who wants to have the lollipop going in one ear and out the other:

I’m sure the school misses the old days, when we were new and paranoid and sure that everyone would be judging us, so we tried extra hard to seem like decent people.