October 16, 2006

This weekend Hayes discovered one of the many joys of living in New England: apple picking.

We took a Saturday trip to Echo Hill Orchard near my parent’s house. No one was sure what Hayes would think of picking apples, but from doing it pre-Hayes I knew there was a tractor involved, so I figured at least we’d have that.

Turns out, he knew exactly what an apple was, despite the fact that he has yet to have one, and really, really wanted to eat one.

As you may know, we’ve been keeping Hayes away from fruit due to an unfortunate rash he develops… around… the… uhm, diaper area. But, what the heck, it was apple picking, so why not make an exception (or, better still find out for sure if apples are a cause).

Guess what? He loved em. And now problems. At first he ran around the orchard yelling “Apple!” Then, after the novelty of it all wore off, he contentedly ran around chewing his apple and pointing to other apples in hopes that my sister might hoist him up so he could get a better look.

Yes, it was good times. Tomorrow, I’ll give you a lowdown on the tractor part.

October 3, 2006

We interrupt this blog for THIS.

September 29, 2006

Hayes and I were watching Curious George yesterday, and before it began they had a “teaching” vignette with a woman and an animated chipmunk/rodent.

“What do you want to be when you grow up?” the woman asked.

“I want to drive a red truck,” replied the rodent.

“Do you know what he wants to be?” the woman asked, looking at the viewer.

“A fireman!” I happily blurted and smiled proudly at Hayes. Damn straight I knew the answer!

“That’s right,” said the woman, “A firefighter!”

Firefighter? Oh, shit, right. Firefighter — a firefighter can be a man or woman. Do I need to remember these things? Is this like sitting “indian style” is now sitting “legs akimbo” (interestingly, akimbo is also used in the culinary work for what you do with the wings of a bird when prepping it to roast)? Sitting aside, in this situation, Hayes would be a fireman, right?

I don’t know.

Is this going to be one of those things that separates us from our kids if we don’t learn to non-sex our words? Is Hayes going to think of me as quaint when I talk about my buddy being a fireman and not a firefighter? Will he apologize to his friends for my sexist behavior? Maybe I’m thinking too much about this, but I suspect it’s in my best interest to choose more “politically acceptable” words.

What then would be a policeman? Right, a police officer. This is going to take some time.

September 28, 2006

For the last 6 years or so, we’ve been subject to the easiest, most simple to grasp math I have ever encountered: Bush Math. It’s simple. One thing is completely congruous (or equal to the other.) It’s very easy to understand, and can be used to prove many points. Best of all, the genius of its simplicity makes anyone who argues against it look stupid — like they have to make things so complicated that one thing cannot directly equal another. Dolts! Here are some of my favorite examples:

1. Against the Iraq war = Non patriotic
2. Against the Iraq war = not supportive of US troops
3. For non-traditional families = anti-family
4. Iraq = terrorist responsible for 9/11

And then, inexplicably, came yesterdays change in the Bush Math. One thing is not necessarily congruent to the other. One thing does not equal the other? Then what does it equal? Are they saying there could possibly be two things that cannot be connected with an equals sign?

Ok, so here it is, the new Bush Math as used yesterday:

1. More jihadists caused by the war in Iraq does not necessarily equal more terrorists

What? Excuse me? This is a non sequitur. It’s way too complicated. If more jihadists does not equal more terrorist, could that possibly mean that against the war in Iraq does not necessarily mean you are not supportive of US troops? Can someone who is for non-traditional families also be pro-family? Oh gosh, this is really shaking things up. Will Bush revisit his old math and apply the rules of this new, some would say “fuzzy” math? Umm… I suspect not.

September 26, 2006

Well, it’s been a while and it’s time for a change that more reflects Hayes’ stage of development. Here it is: Hayes 3.0. (Take that 2.0 crowd, Hayes is 3.0!)

Since my time is limited these days, I haven’t tested it in IE, so feedback is welcome. Let me know if you have any display problems or any other problems, for that matter. Also, please keep in mind this is a work in progress. I really wanted to get it up there, so you’ll notice it’s missing some of the things my old blog had… like a blogroll. For the moment, you can find that at any “single post” page. Rest assured, it will return to the homepage.

Oh, and about the cars. I was inspired by Hayes’ love of Richard Scary (same book I was obsessed with, it turns out) and did all these Scary-esque little illustrations. I’ll be rolling out some shirts, onsies and such with them on Cafe Press… when I get the time.

So, enjoy. And please, let me know if you experience any issues with the new look.

September 22, 2006

Now that Hayes has learned to say “Pee and Poop” in the same protracted 20-month-old-type sentence, he’s become obsessed with going to the bathroom. Even when he doesn’t have to. On Wednesday, he told me he needed to “pee.” I asked if he really needed to pee. “Uh-hu,” was his reply

I took him to the bathroom, where he asked us to put his potty (an aside: keeping the potty in the bathroom has stopped Hayes’ other potty-based behavior: putting the potty on his head). I took of his diapers, he sat on hi spotty for about 30 seconds. Asked what his penis was (for the millionth time, no lie) and then pointed to the real toilet and said “Dada, pee!” I didn’t have to, but he was clearly more interested in me peeing then him. Despite this obvious fact, Hayes’ was none-too-pleased for me to put his diaper back on.

Yesterday he told Jen when she got home that he needed to “Pee and poop.” With the nanny still there, she took him to the bathroom. He sat for thirty seconds, then got up and wanted Jen to pee. Unlike me, however, Jen neglected to the put the diaper back on when he got up. Hayes reiterated his need to pee then proceeded to be on the floor and laugh. “Better than on me, I guess,” Jen said upon telling me the story. True.

Still, this potty training thing has come on fast and furious and Hayes seems to be leading the way. Wonder when he’ll think going to the bathroom is more interesting than playing with the associated bathroom accompaniments. Though, truth be toold, peeing on the floor would be kind of fun, as long as you didn’d need to clean it up. You know, in that “i broke the law type of way.” It would be. Really. You’re just jealous.