2020年5月6日 星期三

Motherhood Changes Us All

The transformation we experience is ongoing and eternal.

Motherhood Changes Us All

Wesley Allsbrook

The most memorable moment of becoming a mother often involves a single day. You give birth, or the child someone else baked inside comes into your life. It’s a before, and an after. But that first day is only the beginning of an identity shift that is ongoing and eternal. The person you are after the first year of motherhood is not the same person you are after year three, year 10 or year 40.

That’s why, in honor of Mother’s Day, we decided to look at the whole messy, glorious, complicated story of identity and motherhood.

We have short essays about how becoming a mother changed the way we look at ourselves, from our relationships to our own ambitions, as well as failure, body image and more, written by Casey Wilson, Nikole Hannah-Jones, Angela Garbes, Robin Tunney, Jennifer Weiner, Amber Tamblyn and several others. There’s a piece by Jenni Gritters about how motherhood rewires your brain, and another by Pooja Lakshmin, M.D., a perinatal psychiatrist, about how not to lose yourself when you become a parent.

During this coronavirus pandemic, it can be hard to know who we are as people, as the barriers between our public and maternal selves have collapsed in ways we never considered. But if there’s a takeaway from all of these stories, it’s that your identity as a mother isn’t fixed; it’s likely to change in ways that will surprise and maybe even delight, as you and your children grow.

Read stories of how motherhood changed us here, and share your own story with us by e-mail or on the @nytparenting Instagram. If I had to describe how motherhood changed me, I would say: I got more comfortable with chaos.

P.S. Click here to read all NYT Parenting coverage on coronavirus. Follow us on Instagram @NYTParenting. Join us on Facebook. Find us on Twitter for the latest updates. Read last week’s newsletter on why it’s OK if you’re not the “fun” parent.

P.P.S. Today’s One Thing to keep your kids occupied: virtual zoo tours. Aquariums, zoos and botanical gardens are offering webcams and other animal-focused broadcasts — “Let us help make your children’s hiatus from school fun and educational,” one zoo said about its video content.

PAID POST: A MESSAGE FROM EDOKI ACADEMY

MONTESSORI ON DEMAND

No preschool? No problem. Wherever they are, kids from 2-6 never stop learning. With this exclusive offer, get Edoki’s Montessori Preschool app for 50 percent off.

BUY HERE

Want More on Motherhood and Identity?

  • In January, Kaitlyn Greenidge wrote a beautiful essay about how she struggled to reconcile her new identity as a mother with her identity as a writer, and how she looked to artists like Toni Morrison and Grace Paley for inspiration.
  • Having children can make you grapple with your racial and ethnic identity in a way you never did before. We have two essays, from Norma Newton and Jami Nakamura Lin, about how they are working to imbue their kids with pride for their heritage.
  • What’s it like to be a new mom, dealing with an old foe, depression? Amanda Rosenberg wrote an honest and funny piece detailing her experience.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let’s celebrate the tiny victories.
My 2-year-old wanted to play “Hide Mommy” with stuffed animals. I got to lie down for 20 minutes! — Anne Thompson, Toronto

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for NYT Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

|

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your Email|Privacy Policy|Contact Us

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

2020年5月5日 星期二

Sympathy for the epidemiologists

The worst people to trust — except for everyone else.
A burial in New Jersey last week.Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Author Headshot

By Paul Krugman

Opinion Columnist

For the past couple of months one epidemiological model — the IHME model from the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation — has played an outsized role in public discussion of Covid-19.

It’s not at all clear that it deserved this role. Among other things, its predictions have been highly unstable, sometimes revised sharply downward and sometimes sharply upward. Many epidemiologists have criticized the model as simplistic. But its very simplicity let it offer state-by-state predictions other models couldn’t. And the White House liked it, at least better than many other models, because it generally predicted a lower death toll than its rivals.

But the White House probably likes IHME less today than it did yesterday: the institute just drastically revised its projected death total upward, from 72,000 to 134,000. Documents obtained by The New York Times suggest that modelers within the U.S. government have also revised death projections sharply upward.

This is terrible news, and makes the push from Trump and many others on the right to relax social distancing look even more irresponsible than it already did. But it also tells us something about the field of epidemiology. It turns out that epidemiologists often disagree, sometimes by a lot. Their forecasts are often wrong, sometimes very wrong indeed. They are, in fact, the worst people to rely on in a crisis — except for everyone else.

In other words, they’re a lot like economists.

In a great essay published early in the Great Depression, John Maynard Keynes lamented that economics is a technical and difficult subject, but “no one will believe it.” He didn’t mean that economists are a priesthood possessed of unique and arcane knowledge, let alone that they are always right, but simply that even making educated guesses about the economy requires both hard thinking and knowing a lot about what smart people have learned over previous decades.

ADVERTISEMENT

Pro tip: If you or someone you listen to claims to have a deep insight all those stuck-up economics professors have missed, it’s overwhelmingly likely that the insight is either (a) something economists have known about for decades if not generations or (b) a well-known fallacy.

And above all, you shouldn’t trust economic assertions from people who combine ignorance of the subject with politically motivated desires to believe certain things.

Well, here we are in a pandemic, a complex phenomenon that depends on human behavior as well as biology. Like financial crises, different pandemics share many common features but differ in detail, in ways that can create huge uncertainty. Nobody can forecast their course especially well, but you do much better listening to the professional epidemiologists than to law professors, politicians, or, yes, economists who claim to know better.

And you should rely more, not less, on the epidemiologists because pandemic prediction and response has become such a politically charged issue. Motivated reasoning — believing things because they’re what you want to be true, not because they’re really true — is a temptation for everyone. But researchers with a professional reputation to maintain are less susceptible than most.

ADVERTISEMENT

So let me give a shout-out to the hard-working, much-criticized epidemiologists trying to get this pandemic right. You may take a lot of abuse when you get it wrong, which you unavoidably will on occasion. But you’re doing what must be done. Also, welcome to my world.

The Times is providing free access to much of our coronavirus coverage; this newsletter, as well as our Coronavirus Briefing newsletter, are free. Please consider supporting our journalism with a subscription.

Quick Hits

Epidemiology amateur hour.

How the White House put an always-wrong economist in charge of second-guessing epidemiologists.

Who are those unmasked men (and women)?

ADVERTISEMENT

Feedback

If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at krugman-newsletter@nytimes.com.

Facing the Music

Flamenco meets heavy metal?YouTube

Rodrigo y Gabriela have basically created their own musical genre; it’s amazing, and here it is from quarantine.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Paul Krugman from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

|

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your Email|Privacy Policy|Contact Us

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/